STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433

          APPEAL OF                                  DOCKET NO.: CB610193RO



          On February 25, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          February 4, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 3510 Bainbridge Avenue, Bronx, New York, 
          Apt. #4F, wherein the Administrator determined that a reduction in 
          rent was warranted based upon a reduction in services.

          The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issue raised by the administrative appeal.

          The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced 
          the rent of the subject apartment.

          On May 19, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner failed to provide sundry services.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on July 31, 1987, 
          alleging that all repairs have either been corrected or are 
          currently in the process of being resolved.


          A DHCR inspection conducted on December 24, 1987, revealed that:

               1.  Windows in the two (2) living rooms, two (2) bedrooms, 
                   two (2) kitchens and bathroom have no screens.

               2.  Sink in bathroom is loose.

               3.  Toilet is defective, flushometer has low, inadequate water 

               4.  Ceiling and walls in the living room are peeling paint and  

               5.  Basement door lock is not secured.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          all repairs specified in the tenant's complaint were corrected and 
          that the tenant failed to inform it of any continuing service 

          The petition was served on the tenant on March 25, 1988.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrator appeal should 
          be denied.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4 (a) of the Rent Stabilization code, a 
          tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
          (DHCR) for reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level in 
          effect prior to the most recent guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR 
          shall so reduce the rent for the period which it is found that the 
          owner has failed to maintain required services.

          Required services are defined in Section 2520.6 (r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

          The Commissioner has also considered and rejects the petitioner's 
          claim on appeal that the required repairs were made prior to the 
          issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.

          A copy of the tenant's complaint was mailed to the owner on July 
          10, 1987 and the Rent Administrator's order was issued on February 
          4, 1988.

          It is apparent that the owner had approximately seven (7) months to 
          attend to the complained-of conditions, but had failed to do so 
          prior to the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.

          The inspector's report showed that as of December 24, 1987, the 
          owner failed to correct all of the service deficiencies specified 
          in the tenant's complaint.


          The Commissioner notes that in support of its petition, the owner 
          submitted a sworn statement from Mehmet Milus, the superintendent, 
          stating that every time he attempted to install window screens, the 
          tenant would postpone and delay the installation.

          The Commissioner also notes that the inspection report revealed 
          that a number of service deficiencies had previously been corrected 
          by the owner and it is apparent, therefore, that the owner had 
          adequate opportunity to install the window screens.

          Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered 
          insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's 

          The Commissioner finds, that the Administrator properly based his 
          determination on the entire record, including the results of the 
          on-site physical inspection conducted on December 24, 1987, and 
          that pursuant to Section 2523.4 (a) of the Code, the Administrator 
          was mandated to reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had 
          failed to maintain services.

          The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted 
          by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this 
          order and opinion.

          The owner's alleged restoration of services subsequent to the rent 
          reduction order is being considered in a seperate proceeding which 
          if confirmed will result in restoration of the rent.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law & Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be,and the same hereby is, denied, and 
          the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.


                                                  JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                  DEPUTY COMMISSIONER 


TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name