ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NOS. BH-410058 RO & BH-410025 RT


                                  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
          APPEALS OF                             DOCKET NOS.:               
                                                 BH-410058 RO 
                                                 BH-410025 RT
                                              :
                                                 DRO DOCKET NO.:          
                                                 BC 410103-S                
              MT. SINAI HOSPITAL      
                     AND                        
              DEWITT ELLIOTT THOMPSON                                    

                              PETITIONERS      : 
          ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On August 5,  1987  and  August  7,  1987,  the  above-named
          petitioner-owner   and   petitioner-tenant   respectively   filed
          Administrative Appeals against an order issued on July  1,  1987,
          by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,  New
          York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 52 East 97th 
          Street, Apartment No. 1-I, New York, N.Y.

               The Commissioner deems it  appropriate  to  consolidate  the
          owner's and tenant's  administrative  appeals  for  determination
          under this Order and Opinion.  

               The issue herein is whether the District Rent  Administrator
          properly determined the tenant's  complaint  of  a  reduction  in
          services.

               The District Rent Administrator's  order,  appealed  herein,
          found that a diminution of services had occurred and reduced  the
          tenant's rent to the level in  effect  prior  to  the  last  rent
          guideline increase, which commenced before the effective date  of
          the rent reduction.  The findings were based on the results of an 
          inspection held on May 19, 1987.




               On appeal, the petitioner-owner alleged,  inter  alia,  that
          the tenant has, in part, refused access to the apartment to  make
          repairs; that the question of repairs and the tenant's right to 
          occupy the apartment was before the Civil Court of  the  City  of
          New York (Index # H.P. 582/87); that resolution  of  the   repair
          issue was the subject of a "court ordered" stipulation; that  the
          only reason all repairs  were  not  completed  in  a  workmanlike
          manner is that the tenant has engaged in dilatory legal maneuvers 






          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NOS. BH-410058 RO & BH-410025 RT
          motivated by a desire to forestall execution  on  an  outstanding
          warrant of eviction and that the DHCR on April 27, 1987,  (Docket
          No. BA-510183) already denied the tenant's request for a  service
          rent reduction, based on another  inspection  held  on  April  7,
          1987, which revealed that services are adequate.  

               The tenant, on appeal, alleged  that  the  courts  have  not
          allowed enough of a rent abatement  and  reiterated  his  service
          complaints.

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

               Pursuant to Section  2523.4(a)  of  the  Rent  Stabilization
          Code, 

               A tenant may apply to the DHCR for a reduction of the legal
               regulated rent to the level in  effect  prior  to  the  most
               recent guidelines adjustment, 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.

               The Commissioner notes that the owner's allegation, that the 
          tenant denied access to the apartment for the purpose of  repairs
          is unsubstantiated  by  any  evidence  in  the  record,  such  as
          appointment letters sent to the tenant by regular  and  certified
          mail and affidavits of  workmen  who  were  denied  access  after
          appointments were  arranged.   Moreover,  the  inspection  report
          revealed that some repairs were actually made  for  which  access
          must have been obtained.

               The owner's claim that the repair question has already  been
          resolved in Civil Court is without  merit  because  the  findings
          contained in the DHCR inspection report of May 22, 1987 belie the 
          owner's claim of substantial service restoration.  



               Moreover, the owner's assertion  that  the  DHCR  inspection
          held on April 27, 1987 determined that services are  adequate  is
          also without merit. 

               A review of that inspection report clearly showed  that  the
          only determination made was that heat and hot water services were 
          adequate.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the  District  Rent
          Administrator properly determined that the owner  had  failed  to
          maintain services based on the evidence of record, including  the
          results of a physical inspection of the subject premises held  on
          May 19, 1987 and  correctly  reduced  the  rent  of  the  subject
          accommodation. 

               This Order and Opinion is issued without  prejudice  to  the
          owner's right  to  file  the  appropriate  application  with  the






          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NOS. BH-410058 RO & BH-410025 RT
          Division for a restoration of rent based upon the restoration  of
          services, if the facts so warrant.

               The Commissioner has reviewed  the  tenant's  assertions  on
          appeal and finds them to be without substance.  

               All that  is  demonstrated  by  the  tenant's  appeal  is  a
          restatement of his service complaints:  the very complaints  that
          were the subject of the  District  Rent  Administrator's  service
          reduction order of July 1, 1987.  

               Additionally,  it  is  clear  that  the  DHCR   is   without
          jurisdiction to alter orders of the Civil Court of  the  City  of
          New York.

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

               ORDERED, that the petitions under Docket Nos.  BH-410058  RO
          and BH-410025 RT be, and the same hereby are denied and that  the
          District Rent 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