ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BH - 210191 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 - 210191 RO
                                              :
                                                 D.R.O. DOCKET NO.:          
                                                 AK - 210592 - S
                                                                          
            SANDER HIRTH                                   
                                                  

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

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On August 4, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed an 
          Administrative Appeal against an order issued on July 7, 1987, by 
          the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, 
          New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 621 
          Lefferts Avenue, Apartment B - 3, Brooklyn, N.Y.

               The issue herein is whether the District Rent Administrator 
          properly reduced the rent of the subject apartment.

               The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, 
          reduced the maximum legal regulated rent for the subject apartment 
          to the level in effect prior to the last rent guideline increase, 
          which commenced before the effective date of the order. 

               This order was based upon an inspection held on April 7, 1987, 
          which showed that:  

                    1- There is evidence of mice in the kitchen.
                    2- Bedroom window sash is stuck, does not open.
                    3- Bathroom walls and ceiling have peeling paint.
                    4- Livingroom wall outlet is defective.
                    5- Stove pilot light is defective.
                    6- Bathroom medicine cabinet door can not be closed.
                    7- Radiators throughout apartment have defective valve   
                       handles.















          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BH - 210191 RO

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that it had not 
          received notice of the tenant's complaint; that some repairs were 
          completed; that others were not; that those that were not were 
          either in the process of being done or were deferred at the 
          tenant's request and further that the DHCR had never conducted an 
          inspection of the apartment. 

               In answer to the petition, the tenant acknowledges that the 
          owner completed all repair work on August 19, 1987.  However, the 
          tenant also noted that the window repair was made in an 
          unworkmanlike manner.

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

               The tenant initiated this proceeding by the filing of an 
          Individual Tenant Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Services in  
          November, 1986. 

               The file clearly demonstrates that a Notice and Transmittal of 
          the Tenant's Complaint was mailed to the owner on December 17, 1986 
          and that separate inspections were conducted of the subject 
          apartment on March 23, 1987 and April 7, 1987. 

               Furthermore, the file contains the owner's detailed answer to 
          the tenant's complaint.   

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner's claims on 
          appeal that the DHCR failed to conduct an inspection of the subject 
          apartment and that he never received notice of the tenant's 
          complaint are without merit.

               Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, 
          a tenant may apply for a reduction of the legal regulated rent and 
          the DHCR shall so reduce the rent for the period for which it is 
          found that the owner has failed to maintain required services. 

               Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

               Based on a careful review of the file, the Commissioner finds 
          that the repair work found necessary by the DHCR inspector was not 
          completed by the owner at the time of the DHCR inspection before 
          the Administrator's order was issued.  Moreover, according to the 
          tenant, the defective window had still not been repaired as of 
          November 1987. 



               The Commissioner further finds that the Administrator properly 
          based his determination on the entire record, including the results 






          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. BH - 210191 RO

          of the on-site physical inspection conducted on April 7, 1987 and 
          that pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, the Administrator 
          was mandated to reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had 
          failed to maintain services. 

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered 
          insufficient reason to disturb the District Rent Administrator's 
          determination.

               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 the restoration of services if 
          the facts so warrant.  The Division's records reveal that no such 
          rent restoration application has been filed.  The parties are 
          advised that the rent reduction appealed herein remains in effect 
          until a rent restoration is ordered.  The tenant may file an 
          overcharge complaint if the owner has collected rent in excess of 
          the amount ordered in the rent reduction order (AK 210592 S).  

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