ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BH 120175 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.:               
                                                 BH 120175 RO 
                                              :
                                                 DRO DOCKET NO.           
                                                 AK 210457 S              
                                             
                 CHAIM BABAD                      

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

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On August 17, 1987, the above-named petitioner owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) against an order  issued
          on July 22, 1987, by  the  Rent  Administrator  at  Gertz  Plaza,
          Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 
          1l77 East 98th Street, Brooklyn,  New  York,  Apartment  No.  1H,
          wherein the Administrator determined the tenant's complaint of  a
          reduction of services.

               The challenged order reduced the tenant's rent based on  the
          results of an  inspection  conducted  on  March  16,  1987.   The
          inspector reported that there were  blinds  and  screens  in  the
          apartment  at  the  time  of  inspection.   The  inspector   also
          indicated that one of the screens in the bedroom was damaged, and 
          that one window in the bedroom and one window in  the  livingroom
          had screens missing. 
               
               On appeal, as below, the owner points out that  neither  the
          tenant's  initial  1979  lease  nor  the  initial  1984  services
          registration indicate that said services are provided.   However,
          the owner's petition was  silent  as  to  whether  services  were
          provided on  the  base  date  or  thereafter.   The  tenant  also
          submitted agency determinations and other  documents,  concerning
          other tenants in the subject building,  stating  that  the  owner
          must repair and replace blinds and screens. 


               The tenant responded to the appeal, as  below,  that  blinds
          and services were provided when he took occupancy in 1979.

               Section 2520.6(r) of the  Rent  Stabilization  Code  defines
          required services as above services furnished or required  to  be
          furnished on the base date and all additional  services  provided
          or  required  to  be  provided  thereafter.   For   purposes   of
          individual apartment services, the applicable base  date  is  May






          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BH 120175 RO
          29, 1974.

               The owner, who is in  the  best  position  to  maintain  and
          present adequate records to establish the service provided on the 
          base date, failed to do so.  The owner  also  failed  to  present
          evidence to rebut the tenant's  assertion  that  the  items  were
          provided when he took occupancy in 1979. 

               The owner's argument, that  the  lease  provisions  make  no
          mention of these items,  ignores  the  question  of  whether  the
          services were provided on the base date or thereafter.

               Concerning  the  initial  1984  services  registration,  the
          Commissioner notes that neither the owner's failure  to  register
          the services at that time, nor the tenants' failure to  challenge
          the services registration served to create a new  base  date  for
          services.  Tenants may initiate complaints of a reduction of base 
          date services at any time, as the facts may warrant. 

               Since the owner failed to submit the required evidence,  the
          Administrator's rent reduction order was proper.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the  provisions  of  the  Rent
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

               ORDERED, that this administrative appeal be,  and  the  same
          hereby is, denied  and  that  the  order  of  the  District  Rent
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, 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