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 NO.:
TRUMP MANAGEMENT INC.,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW,
On January 25, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review of an order issued on December
30, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 8891 20th Avenue, Brooklyn, New York,
various apartments, wherein the Administrator determined the
tenants' complaint of building-wide service decreases.
The challenged order granted building-wide rent reductions based on
the results of an inspection conducted on October 29, 1987 that
confirmed the tenants' complaints of rodent infestation in the
basement and intercom system defects. Complaints of defective
elevators and inadequate janitorial services were not substan-
On appeal, the owner reiterates assertions below that the intercom
system was working properly, and that no rodent infestation prob-
lems existed, as evidenced by supporting statements from the
owner's intercom system contractor and exterminator contractor.
The owner is correct that the Administrator did not consider the
owner's October 1987 submissions that included the statement of the
exterminator services contractor, dated September 18, 1987, and
that of the intercom system contractor, dated September 22, 1987.
Notations on the documents reflect that the papers did not reach
the case docket until after the date of the order.
However, the fact that the Administrator did not have the oppor-
tunity to consider the statements did not affect or contradict the
Agency's inspector's subsequent observations confirming the
conditions in the complaint that were the predicates for the rent
Moreover, the Administrator did consider the owner's September 28,
1987 response that exterminator services were provided and that the
intercoms were working properly.
The owner also argues that the order should be reversed because the
October 29, 1987 inspection report was vague and lacked details as
to the evidence found.
The Commissioner finds that the inspector's statement that there
was evidence of rodent infestation was a sufficient predicate to
impose rent reductions. While the owner argues that the inspection
report was generalized, and failed to detail the evidence observed,
the owner also acknowledges that its extermination measures had
minimized but not eliminated the rodent problem, which the owner
indicates as present in the neighborhood.
The extermination, as performed, appears not to have been effective
to eradicate the rodent problem and such was evident to the in-
spector, notwithstanding that the inspector did not detail his
The inspector also confirmed the tenants' complaint of defective
intercoms. However, as the apartments were not identified, the
Commissioner concurs that the absence of specific information as to
the number of intercoms spot-checked precluded consideration by the
Administrator whether the sample was sufficiently representative to
conclude that the defects were so extensive as to constitute
evidence of a building-wide service decrease, or whether the rent
reductions should have been limited to isolated apartments. Nor
did the inspection report indicate that a system-wide defect in the
intercom was detected that would warrant a rent reduction for all
tenants. Consequently, the condition must be revoked as a basis
for the rent reductions.
For rent stabilized tenants, rent abatements are granted based on
any service decrease to all tenants that signed the complaint.
Division records indicate that the subject premises contains only
rent stabilized units. Rent reductions were therefore warranted
based on a finding of evidence of rodents in the basement.
Agency records also show that the Administrator issued an order on
November 21, 1988 per Docket No. CB220085OR that granted the
owner's rent restoration application, predicated on a restoration
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabili-
zation Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
is, affirmed, as modified above.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA