ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NOS. BH - 420345 - RO & BI - 420161 - 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
          APPEALS OF                             DOCKET NOS.               
                                                 BH - 420345 - RO
                                              :  BI - 420161 - RO
                                                                          
                                                 D.R.O. DOCKET NO.        
                                                 BA - 520001 - SH
               O & O PROPERTIES CORP.             

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

           ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          

               On August 28, 1987 and September 1, 1987, the above-named 
          petitioner-owner filed Administrative Appeals against an order 
          issued on August 25, 1987, by the District Rent Administrator, 92- 
          31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 120 West 44th Street, New York, N.Y., Suite 
          1512.

               These proceedings are being consolidated because they are 
          duplicates of the identical petition that was erroneously assigned 
          two separate docket numbers.

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

               The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, 
          reduced the rent of the subject apartment to the level in effect 
          prior to the last guideline increase based upon the owner's failure 
          to provide air-conditioner service to the subject tenant.

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that air-conditioner 
          service was never provided to the tenant; that she lived in another 
          room until 1984, when at the owner's request, she moved to the 
          subject accommodations; that neither the 1984 registration for the 
          former room, nor the 1985 registration for the subject room shows 
          air-conditioner service as a required service and that the tenant, 
          upon moving, signed a statement on October 15, 1984, acknowledging 
          that her rent did not include electricity for an air-conditioner. 















          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NOS. BH - 420345 - RO & BI - 420161 - RO

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

               Tenant's complaint of September 3, 1985, alleged, inter alia, 
          that she did not have an air-conditioner but that the owner had 
          promised her one. 

               The owner's answer of February 9, 1987, averred that the 
          tenant never had an air-conditioner in her room.

               An inspection held on May 27, 1987, supported the tenant's 
          claim that there was no air-conditioner in the subject room.

               However, both below and on appeal, the owner submitted copies 
          of the registrations for the prior and current room, which 
          conclusively showed that air-conditioner service was not provided 
          by the owner.  The owner also submitted the tenant's signed 
          statement of October 15, 1984, which corroborated the owner's 
          contentions on appeal insofar as tenant acknowledged that her rent 
          did not include air-conditioner electricity charges.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that air-conditioner 
          service is not a required service and that the District Rent 
          Administrator erred by reducing the rent of the subject room.

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

               ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, 
          granted and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and 
          the same hereby is, revoked.

          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