BK 110195 RT
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: BK 110195 RT
JIM ILKHAN, DISTRICT RENT
NO.: BA 110041 S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On November 17, 1987 the above named petitioner-tenant filed
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued November 4, 1987. The order concerned
housing accommodations known as Apt. 416 located at 84-50 169th
Street, Jamaica, N.Y. wherein the Administrator terminated
peti-tioner's complaint of failure to provide required or
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
The tenant commenced this action on January 6, 1987 by
filing a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Services. The
following services deficiencies were alleged:
1. Leaking faucets.
2. Broken window.
3. Broken refrigerator.
4. Holes in walls.
5. Apartment in need of painting.
6. Defective stove.
7. Broken window blinds.
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and
afforded an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response
on February 9, 1987 and alleged the following:
1. The faucets were repaired.
2. New windows installed throughout apartment.
3. Refrigerator working properly.
4. Order issued to paint and plaster.
5. Stove in satisfactory condition.
6. Blinds functioning properly.
7. New windows prevent water seepage.
The owner also provided the Administrator with two letters,
dated February 18 and March 16, 1987, which had been sent to the
tenant. In these letters the owner stated it was ready, willing
and able to make repairs and paint, but that numerous attempts to
gain access to the apartment had been unsuccessful. The owner
requested the tenant's cooperation so that the repairs could be
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the
premises, which was carried out on June 11, 1987. The inspector
reported six services deficiencies in the apartment. Given the
owner's allegations regarding lack of access, as set forth in the
two letters described above, the Administrator ordered a second
inspection. This inspection was of the "no access" type and took
place on October 13, 1987 after notice had been given to all
The DHCR inspector reported that he arrived at the tenant's
apartment along with the Managing Agent of the building and a
handyman. The tenant refused to allow the agent access to the
apartment and refused to provide a reason for failing to do so.
The inspector duly reported these facts to the Administrator. On
November 4, 1987 the Administrator issued the order here under
review wherein the complaint was denied.
On appeal, the tenant states that he never denied the
inspector access to the apartment, and that the inspector was
provided access for the first inspection. The owner filed a
response to the petition on January 18, 1988 wherein it stated
that the tenant did not provide access on October 13, 1987 and
that the Administrator's determination should be affirmed.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
While it is not disputed that the tenant did provide access
to the DHCR inspector on June 11, 1987, it was incumbent upon him
to also provide access on October 13, 1987 when the owner had
personnel available who were ready, willing, and able to proceed
with the necessary repairs. The tenant's failure to admit the
owner's agent and handyman to the apartment without explanation,
as reported by the inspector, gave the Administrator proper
grounds to issue the order here under review. Petitioner has not
set forth any grounds to overturn the order. The order is,
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
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.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner