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.:
EIGES & EIGES MANAGEMENT CO./ DOCKET NO.:
ROSENBERG & ESTIS, P.C. AL230069B
486 Brooklyn Ave.
PETITIONER Brooklyn, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner timely filed a petition for administrative
review of an order issued on October 9, 1987, concerning the
housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
number wherein the Administrator reduced the rents based on a
finding of decreased services.
The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order was
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by this administrative appeal.
Various tenants commenced this proceeding on December 24, 1986 by
filing a complaint of building-wide decreased services, alleging
numerous defective conditions in the subject building.
On January 28, 1987, the Division sent to the owner a copy of the
In an answer filed on February 10, 1987, the owner denied the
allegations as set forth in the tenants' complaint and otherwise
asserted that services are being provided and maintained.
Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject building was
conducted by a Division staff member who confirmed the existence of
The Administrator directed the restoration of services and reduced
the rent of the stabilized tenants to the level in effect prior to
the last rent guideline increase effective February 1, 1987. The
legal rent of the rent-controlled tenants was reduced effective on
the first rent payment date following the issuance date of the
order by $7.00 per month, itemized as follows:
1. Roach infestation in the incinerator room - $ 4.00
2. Public hallway walls and ceilings through-
out the building including the 6th floor
and bulkhead have discolored walls, and
require repair and painting. - 3.00
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends in
substance that "the owner was not appraised that an inspection
would be held and was not given an opportunity to rebut the
findings of the alleged inspection."
In answer, various tenants allege in substance that numerous de-
fective conditions continue to exist.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
The Administrator's determination was based upon an inspection
report which found decreased services in the building. The
determination was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.
The owner's contention that he was not appraised of the inspection
results is without merit. The tenants' complaint, which was
answered by the owner on February 10, 1987, is sufficient notice
(Empress Manor Apartments v. N.Y.S. DHCR, 538 N.Y.S. 2d 49, 147
A.D. 2d 642, February 21, 1989. The inspection report is the work
product of a Division staff member who conducted on-site inspection
to determine questions of fact which arise after joinder of issue
in a proceeding alleging decreased services. The inspector's work
product is an impartial report or finding - not a pleading or a
probative submission by a party to a proceeding which if not served
for response would be a fatal defect in denying due process (ARB -
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
rights as they may pertain to a de novo application to the Division
for a restoration of rent based upon the restoration of services.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA