CA210141RO        
                                  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.:   
                                                  CA210141RO  
                 TRUMP MANAGEMENT INC.,       
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:             
                                  PETITIONER      BG230089B    
          ----------------------------------x



            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW,
                                     AS MODIFIED


          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- 
          tiated.

          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.















          CA210141RO        



          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 
          reductions.

          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 
          observations.

          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.











          CA210141RO        


          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 
          of services.


          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.

           
          ISSUED:




                                                                           
                                                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