CA430190RO
                                  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.: CA430190RO
                                                  
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                   J & S PROPERTIES             DOCKET NO.: AH430063B 
                                                
                                                         
                                 PETITIONER  
          ----------------------------------x                      
                                                                       

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW     
                          
               On January 28, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          December 24, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 14 Avenue A, New York, NY wherein 
          the Administrator directed restoration of services and further 
          ordered a reduction of the maximum legal rents but without a 
          corresponding reduction in the stabilized rent of the only 
          stabilized tenant in Apt. 10.

               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.

               This proceeding was commenced by the filing of a complaint of 
          reduction in services on August 27, 1986.  An inspection conducted 
          by a Division employee on November 2, 1987 confirmed some of the 
          complained of conditions resulting in the December 24, 1987 order.

               In the PAR, the owner contends that the Administrator failed 
          to consider the owner's answer to the tenant's complaint; that the 
          compliance division issued an order under Docket No. ZLCS-000320-B 
          on May 19, 1986 determining that the same conditions complained of 
          herein had already been corrected at the time the complaint was 
          filed; that the owner's attorney was not served with the order 
          despite having filed a notice of appearance; that the agency failed 
          to comply with established precedent in that notice of the 
          complaint, the inspection, and the inspection results were not 
          served on the owner giving the owner an opportunity to cure; and 
          that the conditions are of a minor nature and should not give rise 
          to a rent reduction.














          CA430190RO



               The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be 
          denied.

               The order hereunder review directed restoration of the 
          following services: 1. superintendent not available at time of 
          inspection; 2. dirty carpeting first to fifth floors; and, 3. 
          missing light bulb.  This resulted in a rent reduction of $3.25 per 
          month for the rent controlled tenants but no corresponding decrease 
          for the rent stabilized tenants who joined in the complaint.

               The conditions addressed in the order under Docket No. ZLCS- 
          000320-B issued on May 19, 1986, cited by the owner in support of 
          its petition, are not the same conditions as those covered in the 
          order hereunder review.  The owner's correspondence of May 18, 
          1987, which it claims was not considered by the Administrator in 
          this case, relates to the services addressed in the May 19, 1986 
          order and is irrelevant to the matter herein.

               The record reflects that the owner, the petitioner herein, was 
          served through its attorneys with a copy of the tenants' complaint 
          and supplied with answer forms on May 26, 1987.  The Administrative 
          record does not contain an answer to the complaint.  Despite 
          service of the complaint on the owner through its attorneys, and 
          the notice of appearance filed on letterhead stationery of the 
          attorney's office the order was served only on the owner at the 
          owner's address.  This is harmless error as the order was received 
          and this PAR was timely filed.

               The Commissioner finds that the owner is not entitled to 
          receive notice of DHCR inspections prior to the issuance of a 
          finding of fact where, as here, the inspection merely substantiated 
          certain allegations in the tenants' complaint.  In addition, the 
          failure to afford an owner an opportunity to receive the results of 
          inspection prior to a determination is not a denial of due process 
          where, as here, the inspection report confirms some of the 
          allegations in the complaint and the owner was fully informed of 
          these allegations but chose not to contest them.

               As for the owner's allegation that the conditions are too 
          minor to warrant a rent reduction, the Commissioner finds that  
          Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations authorizes a 
          rent reduction in an amount which the Commissioner finds to be the 
          reduction in the rental value of the housing accommodation because 
          of the decrease in essential services.  The $3.25 per month rent 
          reduction accurately reflects the decreased services cited in the 
          inspector's report.










          CA430190RO

               The Division's records reveal that the owner's rent 
          restoration application was granted on November 1, 1988 
          (CB420059OR).

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and 
          Code, the City Rent Law and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it 
          is,

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



          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