BJ 410201-RO

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NO.:
                                                  BJ             410201-RO;
                  IVAN  STUX,                        RENT   ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      BF 410108-S 


          On October 29, 1987  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of  the  Rent
          Administrator issued September 24,  1987.   The  order  concerned
          housing accommodations known as Apartment 1-A located at 520 West 
          End Avenue, New York, New York.  The Administrator ordered a rent 
          reduction due to decreased apartment services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed the record and h s  carefully  con-
          sidered that portion  relevant  to  the  issues  raised  by  this

          The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing  a  complaint  al-
          leging decreased  apartment  services.   The  following  services
          were complained of:

                    Living Room:
               1.   Ceiling - water leak stain and bubbled paint.
               2.   Floor section (16 sq. ft.) water damaged.  Tiles 
                    peeling and floor warped.
               3.   Windows - splintered casement.  Windows slip side- 
                    to-side - won't open fully or stay open.
               4.   Paint peeling.  Walls never sanded after last 

               1.   Riser water stained.
               2.   Wall is water stained.
               3.   Ceiling stained and sagging.
               4.   Window inoperable.
               5.   Parquet floor water damaged and warped in places.
               6.   Closet light fixture missing.
               7.   Closet saddle missing.
               8.   Walls never sanded after last repair.

          BJ 410201-RO

               1.   Stove handles are broken.
               2.   Floor at counter side sinks from level of rest of 
               3.   Roach access from basement causing infestation.

               1.   Loose and detached wall tiles.
               2.   Window inoperable.
               3.   Window sill wood cracked, with open spaces.
               4.   Faucet drips.
               5.   Steam riser rusted.

               1.   Entrance door sticks.
               2.   Bell buzzer wires exposed.  
               3.   Ceiling lamp fixture loose and hanging.
               4.   Door saddle missing.
               5.   Floor tile pieces missing and floor unsupported in 
               6.   Closet floor tile pieces missing and floor tiles 
               7.   Walls around door need sanding.
               8.   Tile ceiling stained and sagging.

          The owner failed to respond.  The Administrator  ordered  a  phy-
          sical inspection of the premises which was conducted on August 7, 
          1987.  The inspector found the following services deficiencies:

               1.   Peeling paint and plaster throughout apartment.
               2.   Floor tiles shaky and warped throughout apartment.
               3.   Defective windows throughout.

               4.   Two stove handles are missing.
               5.   Hot water faucet in sink leaks.
               6.   Saddle missing from entrance door.
               7.   Bell buzzer wire exposed, light fixture is 

          BJ 410201-RO
               8.   Roach infestation.

          The Administrator's order duly followed.

          On appeal the owner, through counsel,  denies  that  any  of  the
          reported conditions exist.   Petitioner  advances  the  following

               1.   An inspection by the New York  City  Department
                    of Housing  Preservation  and  Development  and
                    one by petitioner, conducted on  or  about  the
                    time that the DHCR inspection was  held,  found
                    no services problems.

               2.   Petitioner was neither notified of the conditions 
                    in the apartment nor notified of the  DHCR  inspec-

               3.   The ceiling was repaired on February 11,  1986  and
                    the tenant never complained of  peeling  paint  and

               4.   Numerous  apartment  repairs  were  conducted  from
                    April to August 1986.

               5.   Painting and plastering was done  "throughout  1986
                    and in February 1987."

               6.   Regular extermination services are provided to  the

          The owner attached copies of bills and invoices from  contractors
          for repairs.

          The tenant filed a lengthy response to  the  petition.   In  that
          response she again detailed the numerous services deficiencies in 
          the apartment.  Petitioner filed a response to  the  answer.   In
          that response petitioner alleged inter alia that a stipulation of 
          settlement entered into as a result of a Civil Court  non-payment
          proceeding set forth the items which petitioner agreed to repair. 
          The owner also restated its contentions as advanced in the  orig-
          inal petition.


          After a careful review of the evidence in the record t e  Commis-
          sioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

          Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code provides:

                   "A tenant may apply to the DHCR for a reduc-
                    tion 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 ser- 

          BJ 410201-RO
          Required services are defined in  Section  2520.5(r)  to  include
          repairs and maintenance.

          The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based  his
          determination on the entire record, including the results of  the
          on-site physical inspection conducted on August 7, 1987. 

          Due process does not require that an owner who  has  been  served
          with a copy of a tenant's complaint listing conditions  requiring
          repair be notified of a forthcoming inspection or served  with  a
          copy of an inspection report confirming the  existence  of  those
          conditions before a rent reduction can be ordered.   Accordingly,
          that aspect of petitioner's argument is rejected.

          Petitioner offers no proof as to when or whether the alleged  HPD
          inspection took place.  In any event, DHCR requirements for main 
          tenance of services are independent of any other agency  and  the
          results of non-DHCR inspections have no bearings on the Divi-   
          sion's findings.

          Petitioner's statements regarding repairs and apartment  mainten-
          ance are contradicted by the inspector's report.  It  is  settled
          that this report is entitled to more probative  weight  than  the
          unsupported assertions of a party to t e  proceeding.   The  Com-
          missioner notes that, in petitioner's response  to  the  tenant's
          answer, a stipulation of repairs is set forth.  That  stipulation
          can be viewed as an admission, by the  owner,  that  repairs  are
          needed to correct services problems in the apartment.  The  owner
          may file for rent restoration when services have been  completely
          restored.  The Administrator's order is affirmed.

          THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and  Code,  and
          it is,

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same  hereby  is,  denied
          and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby
          is, affirmed.


                                                ELLIOT SANDER
                                                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