OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433

        APPEAL OF                                  DOCKET NO.: BC130044RO 

                                            :      RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S 
        Queens Park Realty Corp.                   DOCKET NO.: AK130038RP
        c/o Provident Operating Corp.

                            PETITIONER      :


        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 

        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 

        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 


        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 

        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. 

                                                    Joseph A. D'Agosta
                                                    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