ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: BJ 110258 RO & BI 110228 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
APPEAL OF DOCKET NOS.:
BJ 110258 RO
: BI 110228 RT
PLAZA REALTY INVESTORS
PETITIONER-OWNER RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
AC 110761 S
DORIS STORCH
PETITIONER-TENANT :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING OWNER'S PETITION
FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW, AND DENYING
TENANT'S PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named petitioner-owner and petitioner-tenant filed
timely petitions for administrative review of an order issued on
September 11, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodation known as 65 - 10 108th Street, Queens, New
York, Apartment 4-L, wherein the Administrator determined the
tenant's complaint of decreased services per Docket No. AC - 110761
S.
The challenged order reduced the tenant's rent based on the
results of inspections conducted on October 3, 1986 and February
17, 1987 that found bathroom plaster repairs done in an
unworkmanlike manner in that plastered surfaces required painting,
defects in the sashes,screens and locks of various windows in the
bedroom, livingroom, and bathroom, and some missing and/or
unmatched kitchen floor tiles.
The Administrator did not include vermin infestation as a
basis for the rent reduction notwithstanding that both inspection
reports cited evidence thereof. The reports did reflect that the
owner had addressed the conditions cited by the tenant as giving
rise to the problem. The tenant had complained of a hole under the
kitchen sink and of a defective refrigerator tray beneath the
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: BJ 110258 RO & BI 110228 RT
freezer that was dripping water in the refrigerator resulting in
food spoilage. The inspectors observed that the hole under the
sink had been repaired, that the refrigerator tray had been
replaced, and that the refrigerator was operating properly. The
inspectors also reported that periodic exterminator services were
available.
The owner's petition points out that the tenant's initial
complaint did not concern the defective living room, bedroom and
bathroom windows and/or screens, nor the kitchen floor tiles, that
these additional items were submitted by the tenant in response to
the Administrator's request for additional information, and that
the owner was never served with a copy of the notice. An
examination of the record confirms the owner's assertions.
The owner was therefore denied the opportunity to be heard in
these additional service complaints or to correct the conditions.
This lack of due process constitutes an irregularity warranting a
revocation of conditions as basis for a rent reduction,
notwithstanding that they were confirmed on inspection.
Concerning the bathroom repairs, the owner concedes that these
items remained outstanding for some time due to the tenant's lack
of cooperation in providing access during working hours. In
support, the owner submitted copies of letters and mailgrams to the
tenant reflecting the owner's initiative to schedule appointments,
despite the tenant's failure to respond to prior communications.
The owner also submitted an affidavit from an employee stating that
the bathroom leakage problem, defective plaster and stuck window
were corrected. Also submitted was a paint order, signed by the
tenant and dated August 27, 1987, that the entire apartment had
been painted.
In further support, the owner cites unrelated rent restoration
proceedings per Docket No. AL 110076 OR reflecting that a March 20,
1987 inspection report of those proceedings indicated, among other
items, that the entire apartment had been painted, controverting
the February 17, 1987 inspection results in the proceedings herein
under appeal.
Normally, no rent reduction order is imposed if the
Administrator has evidence before the order is issued that services
referred to in the complaint have been restored. The finding of
inadequate bathroom wall repairs is, therefore, also revoked as a
basis for a rent reduction.
As to the tenant's administrative appeal, it is noted that the
determination above to revoke the Administrator's order on the
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: BJ 110258 RO & BI 110228 RT
grounds that the owner was denied due process notice with regard to
the complaints of defective windows also compels dismissal of the
tenant's claim on appeal that the rent reduction should remain as
the livingroom and bathroom windows still do not function properly.
The tenant's admission on appeal, that the owner provided a
working refrigerator in August 1987 which was prior to the date of
the Administrator's order, rendered moot the tenant's claim on
appeal regarding the allegedly defective refrigerator unit.
Concerning the tenant's claim that the apartment continued to
be roach infested, the owner responded that the tenant failed to
provide sufficient access to correct the condition. In support,
the owner submitted an affidavit from the superintendent stating
that the tenant had denied the exterminator access on several
occasions. The tenant did not dispute it, suggesting instead that
the measures utilized were inadequate.
Although the tenant permitted the owner to address the
conditions cited by the tenant as giving rise to the problem, it
appeared that the tenant was reluctant to cooperate with the
owner's requests to continue eradication measures. In this
respect, the tenant has an obligation to provide access
periodically, and to comply with the owner's reasonable requests to
eliminate, where feasible, substances which afford harborage for
vermin. Under the circumstances, a finding of failure to maintain
services based on evidence of vermin was not warranted. The
Administrator's determination of the issue was correct.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that the owner's petition be granted, in part, to the
extent of revoking the Rent Administrator's findings of defective
bathroom wall repairs, defective windows, and missing and/or
mismatched kitchen floor tiles as bases for a rent reduction. It
is further
ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be denied. However, the
directive to correct the conditions cited in the Administrator's
order is affirmed and failure to do so may subject the owner to
appropriate sanctions. It is further
ORDERED, that the tenant's rent is restored to pre-reduction
levels plus applicable guidelines or other increases.
ISSUED:
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: BJ 110258 RO & BI 110228 RT
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
