ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BG - 430422 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 APPEAL
          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.               
                                                 BG - 430422 RO   
                                              :
                                                 DRO ORDER NO.           
                                                 AF - 430062 - B             
                      
                      21 E9 ASSOCIATES                       
                                                  

                              PETITIONER      : 
          ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On July 29, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed an 
          Administrative Appeal against orders issued on June 26, 1987 by the 
          District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New 
          York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 21 East 9th 
          Street, New York, New York, various apartments.

               The issue herein is whether the District Rent Administrator 
          properly reduced the rents of the subject apartments.

               The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, 
          reduced the rents of rent stabilized apartments to the level in 
          effect prior to the last guideline increase and reduced the rents 
          of rent controlled apartments by a total of $10.00 per month based 
          upon inspections, which revealed the following:  

               1. Vestibule light and light near elevator 
                  defective, wires exposed.
               2. Two (2) balusters missing between fifth
                  and top floor.  One (1) baluster missing
                  between fourth and fifth floors.




















          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BG - 430422 RO

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, inter alia, that the 
          inspectors were in error; that the conditions found by the 
          inspectors were isolated occurrences and are considered ordinary 
          maintenance; that these same conditions were minor in nature and 
          not worthy of a rent reduction; that the owner never received 
          notice of the inspection and that the tenants never complained 
          about defective lights.

               After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record 
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

               The tenants filed a Statement of a Decrease in Building-wide 
          Services on June 13, 1986, which shows clearly that the tenants 
          complained, inter alia, about the absence of lights in the entrance 
          vestibule and public hallways.

               Additionally, the DHCR inspections held on September 26, 1986 
          and December 5, 1986 confirmed several of the tenants' service 
          deficiency allegations.

               The file, however, is devoid of any credible evidence that 
          these deficient service items were actually corrected by the owner 
          before the DHCR inspections.

               The Commissioner has also considered and rejects petitioner's 
          claims on appeal that the conditions found below are ordinary 
          maintenance, minor in nature and not rent-reducing items.  
          Defective vestibule and hallway lights and missing balusters are 
          serious service deficiencies worthy of the owner's attention.  
          These deficiencies should have been immediately corrected.  
          Clearly, the conditions found were not minor items that occur 
          normally despite ongoing maintenance or which would be addressed as 
          part of periodic maintenance.

               Concerning the petitioner-owner's arguments that the 
          Administrator failed to give it notice of the inspection or the 
          results, the Commissioner finds that due process does not require 
          that the owner be informed that inspections are to take place or 
          that it be sent copies of the reports, with an opportunity to 
          rectify the condition or to respond.  The owner had adequate notice 
          from the tenants' complaints of conditions requiring its attention. 








               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the District Rent 
          Administrator properly based his determination on the entire record 






          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BG - 430422 RO

          including the results of the on-site inspections conducted on 
          September 26, 1986 and December 5, 1986 and properly reduced the 
          rents of the complaining tenants upon determining that the owner 
          had failed to maintain services.

               The Commissioner notes that the owner's rent restoration 
          application was granted (BG 440039 - OR) and that the owner's 
          request for a prospective stay of the rent reduction order was also 
          granted on September 1, 1988.  Accordingly, this order of denial of 
          the petition revokes the stay and reinstates the rent reduction 
          effective as of July 1, 1986 for the stabilized tenants and the 
          first rent payment after June 26, 1987 for the rent controlled 
          tenants until August 1, 1987 for stabilized tenants and the first 
          rent payment following January 26, 1988 for the rent controlled 
          tenants.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and 
          Code, and the provisions of the Rent and Eviction Regulations for 
          New York City, it is

               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          denied, and that the District Rent Administrator's orders be, and 
          the same hereby are, affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Acting Deputy Commissioner




                                                    







    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name