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 NOS.:
NICHOLAS M. SCHICK,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 7, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
November 2, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 229 East 29th Street, New York, New York,
wherein the Administrator determined that there had been a
reduction of building-wide services, directed a restoration of
services, and ordered a reduction of the legal rents. The owner
filed the second PAR on December 29, 1987 to appeal the Adminis-
trator's amended order issued on December 16, 1987 to include an
apartment inadvertently omitted from the November 2, 1987 order.
The tenants commenced the proceedings by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner has failed to maintain various building-
The owner filed an answer stating, in essence, that either services
were adequate, or that other required repairs, or replacement of
equipment, had been completed or were under way.
Inspections of the subject premises conducted on April 3 and 8,
1987 found minor peeling paint and plaster throughout the public
areas, an uncovered junction box and loose electrical wiring in the
laundry room, an uncovered uninsulated water pipe in the basement,
and roof fans not operating at the time of inspection. Other items
of complaint were found to have been corrected.
Based on the inspector's observations, the Administrator determined
that the tenants were entitled to rent reductions.
The owner's appeal sets forth only that the defective conditions
found had been cured. Copies of the owner's appeal were served to
the tenants on February 8, 1988, many of whom promptly responded
that a majority of the conditions cited had not been corrected when
the owner filed the appeal.
The owner does not set forth any basis for modifying or revoking
the Administrator's determination. the owner does not identify any
error of law or fact in the Administrator's determination below
that found that the owner was not maintaining required services.
In fact, the owner's appeal suggests that repairs were completed
after the date of the Administrator's order, which is not a basis
for modifying or revoking the Administrator's determination.
Division records do reveal the Administrator granted the owner's
rent restoration application in Docket No. CD430096OR on October
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
for New York City, the City Rent Control Law, and the Rent Stabili-
zation Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied,
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA