Docket No. BI 710140-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 REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:BI 710140-RO
DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: LBF 710022-S
Premises: 750 Shore Road,
Apt. 5L, Long
Beach, NY
John P. Loconsolo, Manager
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations described above.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to
the issues raised by the petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a complaint
assertng that the owner had failed to maintain services in the
subject premises. Specifically, the tenant maintained that the
owner had failed to open the swimming pool, and this closure was
the owner's fault, due to the fact that the owner had been
"notified about defect of the pool about 9 months, ago but failed
to do anything about it".
In its answer the owner alleged that it was notified by the
Board of Health that the pool could not be opened unless the filter
system was changed. The owner continued that it had requested a
postponement of the Board of Health's order and that it be allowed
to use the old filter for another year. This request was denied,
and the owner thus did not open the pool.
The owner stated that "we do not feel a rent reduction should
be granted for something we cannot control".
In his answer to the owner's answer the tenant alleged that the
Docket No. BI 710140-RO
owner had notice of the Board of Health's decision, but had failed
to act on it in a timely manner.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services
and further ordered a reduction of the regulated rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner reiterates
the allegations it made in its answer below.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
The tenant's testimony before the Administrator that the owner
had nine month's notice that the Board of Health required a new
pool filter; and that the owner did not make the repairs, thus
leading the Board of Health to close the pool and thus reduce
services is undisputed by the owner. The owner merely, argues that
because the Board of Health required that either a new filter
system be installed on the pool must be closed somehow relieves the
owner of responsibility for providing the service of a swimming
pool. The Commissioner feels that the owner's contention made
below and on appeal that it was not responsible for the decrease in
service is not tenable.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Tenant
Protection Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and, that the order of the Rent
Administrator be and same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
Joseph A. D'Agosta
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
