BD 420285-RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
GERTZ PLAZA
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
----------------------------------x
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
BD 420285-RO
CHARLES SARACCO,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER LC 003528-S
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
IN PART
On April 15, 1987 the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review against an order issued on
March 12, 1987 by an administrator concerning the housing accom-
modation known as 157 Prince Street, Apartment 3-TF, New York,
New York wherein the administrator determined that the owner was
not maintaining certain services and ordered a rent reduction of
$29.00 per month.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issues raised by the administrative appeal.
The tenant commenced this proceeding on April 22, 1985 by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to mainta n cer-
tain services in the subject apartment. Specifically, the tenant
asserted that:
1. The windows throughout the apartment required
maintenance,
2. the sink was defective, the bathtub was leaking
and rusty and
3. the apartment had never been painted.
The tenant indicated that she took occupancy of the apartment in
1955 and that the apartment is subject to rent control.
In its answer the owner asserted that all services were properly
maintained and that with respect to painting, the DHCR had pre-
viously issued an order in which it was determined that painting
is not an essential service included in the maximum legal rent
and therefore is not required to be provided by the landlord.
The owner further stated that the subject building had been
converted into habitable housing units after 1947 and should,
therefore be exempt from the rent control regulations. The owner
asserted that in 1963 the building was renovated and changed from
BD 420285-RO
a rooming house to two self-contained housing units plus a studio
and a store. An altered building application was submitted,
dated September 3, 1963, which indicates an existing use of 3
families plus a store and a proposed use of two families plus an
office and a store.
On May 21, 1986 a DHCR inspection revealed:
1. that two living room sashes were rotted,
2. one living room glass pane cracked,
3. one kitchen window rattled,
4. one bathroom window glass was loose,
5. the hot and cold water faucets of the bathtub
leaked, and
6. the apartment needed painting throughout.
The Administrator concluded that the owner had not established
that apartment was not subject to control and on March 12, 1987
issued an order in which it was determined that the landlord had
failed to maintain services. The maximum legal rent of the sub-
ject apartment was reduced by $29.00 per month, of which $20.00
was for failure to paint.
In this petition the owner contends that it has completed all of
the necessary repairs except for the subject painting and sub-
mitted a copy of an order issued July 23, 1981, under Docket No.
2TP 40561 in which it is determined that painting is not an
essential service included in the maximum legal rent for the
subject apartment.
The tenant responded asserting that the landlord's petition
should be denied because it has failed to maintain those services
for which the rent was reduced.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition for admin-
istrative review should be granted in part.
The Commissioner finds that the Administrator's order was prop-
erly based on the entire record, including the results of the
on-site physical inspection conducted on May 21, 1986 and that
pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
the Administrator was authorized to reduce the re t upon deter-
mining that the owner had failed to maintain services. The owner
has not submitted any evidence to establish that the required
repairs were completed before the order was issued.
However, with reference to the owner's assertion that painting is
not an essential service included in the maximum legal rent, the
Commissioner finds that the order issued July 23, 19 1 corrobor-
ates this statement. Therefore, so much of the Administrator's
order, issued March 12, 1987, reducing the maximum legal rent by
$20.00 a month for failure to paint is revoked.
The tenant may pay any arrears due as a result of this order in
twenty-four (24) equal monthly installments.
BD 420285-RO
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
right to file the appropriate application with the Division for a
restoration of rents based upon the restoration of services, if
the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted
in part, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, modified in accordance with this Order and Opinion.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
