BJ430388RO
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.:
BJ430388RO
YALE PINEHURST ASSOCIATES,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER BB520677S
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review (PAR) of an order issued September 18, 1987 concerning the
housing accommodations known as 105 Pinehurst Avenue, New York,
New York, Apartment 54, wherein the Rent Administrator determined
that certain conditions found in the subject apartment constituted
services decreases.
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 owner commenced the proceedings on February 24, 1987 by filing
a complaint that the owner had failed to maintain certain services
in the subject apartment.
Inspections of the subject apartment conducted on July 28 and 31,
1987, by a Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) in-
spector, confirmed the existence of defective conditions, in that
the tenant's apartment entrance door needed painting, that the
kitchen, bedroom and bathroom walls and ceilings had peeling paint
and plaster, and that six windows in the apartment were rotted or
otherwise defective.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further, ordered a reduction of the controlled rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner states, in
substance, that the September 18, 1987 order was the first notice
the owner received concerning the tenant's complaint. The
BJ430388RO
petitioner also points to an agreement by the parties in Housing
Court, dated March 11, 1987, so ordered by the Court; a copy had
been submitted by the tenant in the proceedings below. The
agreement provided, among other things, that the owner would paint
the apartment, and repair the door and window defects.
The owner's evidence of repairs submitted on appeal includes a paid
bill from the painter, a letter from the tenant dated April 25,
1987 indicating satisfaction, a contract for the installation of
new windows building-wide commencing shortly after the date of the
petition, and a copy of a notice of violation (which was not
legible, but which the owner claims shows that the apartment and
entrance door painting violations had been corrected).
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the City Rent and Evictions Regula-
tions, DHCR may order rent reductions, where it is found that an
owner has failed to maintain essential services. The owner's
petition does not establish any basis for modifying or revoking the
Administrator's order which determined that the owner was not
maintaining services, based on a physical inspection confirming the
existence of defective conditions in the subject apartment for
which rent reductions were warranted.
Concerning the owner's bare claim of a denial of due process, the
record below shows that the Administrator mailed the tenant's
complaint to the owner on March 10, 1987, properly addressed. The
owner also had notice of the conditions from the Housing Court
proceedings, which were not resolved until after the tenant filed
the complaint below.
The owner's contentions, that the owner completed paint and plaster
repairs to the tenant's expressed satisfaction, thereby suggesting
that there was no basis for the complaint, as the owner had com-
plied promptly with the court ordered stipulation and that the
violations had been removed, do not explain how the DHCR's subse-
quent inspection found that the conditions complained of continued
to exist.
The owner's statement that the replacement of windows was imminent
acknowledges that the window defects had not been corrected by the
date of the Administrator's order, notwithstanding the owner's good
intentions.
BJ430388RO
Division records also show that the Administrator granted a partial
rent restoration on March 31, 1988 per Docket No. BJ520100OR, and
a complete rent restoration on October 18, 19898 per Docket No.
CD520008OR.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent & Eviction Law and Regula-
tions for the City of New York, 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.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
