DHCR Decisions                                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.: BC130044RO                                            :      RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S        Queens Park Realty Corp.                   DOCKET NO.: AK130038RP        c/o Provident Operating Corp.                                            :                            PETITIONER      :        ------------------------------------X            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW        On March 3, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition for        administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on February 2, 1987, by        the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation known as        65-10 99th Street, Rego Park, N.Y., various tenants, wherein the        Administrator determined that the maximum legal rent for rent        controlled apartments should be reduced by $19.00 per month, based upon        a diminution of services.  The Rent Administrator's order was based        upon an inspection held on October 7, 1985.        The commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and has        carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issue        raised by the administrative appeal.        The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced the        maximum legal rent of the rent controlled apartments in the subject        premises.        On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that the Rent Administrator        erred by issuing the order reducing the rents of rent controlled        apartments because the inspection which found a diminution of services        was held many months before the issuance of the appealed order and        that, in fact, the conditions were corrected between the date of the        last inspection and the issuance date of the Rent Administrator's        order.        After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the        Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal should        be denied.        The Commissioner notes that the owner filed a PAR of the Rent        Administrator's order based on the same complaint which reduced the        rents of Rent Stabilized apartments in the subject building, under        docket number ARL09435Q, and that on November 13, 1989, an order was        issued denying the owner's petition.  The Rent Administrator's order        (QCS000589B) issued on March 13,1986 was based on two inspections held        on October 7, 1985 and February 14, 1986, which substantiated the        tenants' allegations that the owner was not maintaining services in the        building.        DOC.#BC130044RO        An amended order was issued on February 2, 1987 which ordered a $19.00        per month rent reduction for all rent controlled tenants in the        building effective the first rent payment day following the date of        issuance of the order.        Notwithstanding the owner's allegations of repair, the tenants of the        subject building have consistently informed the Division that the        complained-of conditions have not been corrected.  A review of the file        on appeal (BC130044RO) reveals that a number of these statements were        filed after February 2, 1987; the date of issuance of the Rent        Administrator's order.  Moreover in subsequent rent restoration        proceedings, inspections revealed that services had still not been        restored (AJ130060OR, BK130054OR, CE130068OR).        The Commissioner has considered the owner's contention that the        appealed order was issued in error and rejects this argument.        A review of the file reveals that at least one Rent Controlled tenant        signed the complaint form (September 10, 1985) and that as a        consequence thereof all rent controlled tenants would be entitled to        a reduction in the maximum legal rent; whether or not, they signed the        complaint.        Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations provides in        pertinent part, that the Administrator may order a decrease in rent        based on a finding that there has been a decrease in the  dwelling        space, essential services, furniture, furnishings or equipment.        The owner had seventeen months from the date of service of the tenants'        complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order to        investigate the tenants' complaint and to make the necessary repairs,        but failed to do so.        The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based his        determination on the entire record including the results of the on-site        physical inspections conducted on October 7, 1985 and February 14,        1986; and that pursuant to Section 2202.16 (a) of the Rent and Eviction        Regulations the Administrator acted properly in reducing the rent upon        determining that the owner had failed to maintain services.        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 rent based upon a 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, denied, and the        Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is affirmed.        ISSUED:                                                                                                                  Joseph A. D'Agosta                                                    Deputy Commissioner