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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: CF210122RO
          FRHADA ASSOCIATES                       RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: CC210004HW

               On June 1, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued April 26, 1988. The order concerned housing 
          accommodations known as Apt. 6 located at 1268 52nd Street, 
          Brooklyn, N.Y.  The Administrator directed restoration of services 
          and ordered a rent reduction based on the owner's failure to 
          maintain adequate hot water.

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 

               The tenant commenced this proceeding on March 1, 1988 by 
          filing an application for a rent reduction based on the owner's 
          failure to maintain adequate hot water.

               The owner was served with a copy of the application and 
          afforded an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on 
          March 21, 1988 and stated that inspections held in conjunction with 
          other proceedings before the agency reported that adequate hot 
          water temperature was being maintained, that the owner has 
          continually paid its gas bill and that tenants are running the hot 
          water in order to cause the hot water temperature to drop.
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on April 7, 1988 and 
          revealed that the hot water temperature was 102 degrees.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on April 
          26, 1988 and ordered a rent reduction based on the inspector's 

               On appeal the owner, as represented by counsel, states that 


          the owner was entitled to notice of the inspection and an 
          opportunity to correct the condition reported by the inspector, 
          that the tenant ran the hot water prior to the inspector's visit 
          thereby causing the temperature to plunge and that an inspection 
          held in conjunction with a building-wide rent reduction proceeding  
          reported adequate hot water leading to the dismissal of the 
          complaint.  The petition was served on the tenant on July 22, 1988.

               The tenant filed a response on August 7, 1988 and stated, in 
          sum, that the water had not been run before the inspection 
          described above, that the owner was still not maintaining adequate 
          hot water and that, therefore, the petition should be denied.  The 
          owner filed a reply on November 9, 1988 wherein it essentially 
          restated the allegation made in the petition.
               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner notes that it is well settled that an owner 
          is not entitled to notice of a scheduled DHCR inspection or a copy 
          of the results.  The filing of the complaint puts the owner on 
          notice of the existence of the condition and the need to 
          investigate and make repairs.  (Empress Manor Apts. v. DHCR 538 
          N.Y.S.2d 49 [2nd Dept., 1989]).  

               The other grounds raised by the owner are inadequate to rebut 
          the inspector's report.  There is no evidence that the tenant ran 
          the hot water in the manner suggested by the petitioner and the 
          tenant retained the right to file the instant complaint regarding 
          the failure to maintain an ongoing service regardless of the 
          disposition of any prior proceeding before the DHCR.  The order 
          here under review is affirmed.  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 may file for rent restoration when services have 
          been restored.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it 

               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.


                                             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