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.: CA430319RO
Douglas Elliman - Gibbons & Ives, DOCKET NO.: BA430058B
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 22, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner timely
refiled a petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order
issued on October 16, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning
the housing accommodation known as 107 East 82nd Street, New York,
N.Y., various apartments wherein the Administrator determined that
the maximum legal rent for rent controlled apartments should be
reduced by $7.00 per month based upon a diminution of services.
The Rent Administrator's order was based upon an inspection held on
April 24, 1987. The Rent Administrator also directed the
restoration of all services.
The Rent stabilized tenants did not request a rent reduction
in this proceeding.
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 rents of various rent controlled apartments in the
On appeal, the petitioner-owner contended that the Rent
Administrator erred by issuing the order which reduced the rents of
rent controlled tenants because all maintenance and repairs were
performed in a timely fashion.
The petition was served on the tenants on March 10, 1988 and
on March 21, 1988, the tenants filed answers to the petition
stating that the conditions which were the subject of the Rent
Administrator's reduction order have not been corrected.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record
the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
For rent controlled tenants, Section 2202.16 of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations provides that a finding that an owner failed
to maintain essential services may result in an order of decrease
in maximum rent, in an amount determined by the discretion of the
Rent Administrator, to reflect the decreased rental value because
of the decrease in services.
The inspection held on April 24, 1987 demonstrated that there
was peeling paint and plaster in the public areas and further that
the public areas were in need of cleaning.
A review of the record before the Administrator clearly shows
that the owner did not submit any evidence that the deficiencies
noted on the inspector's report were completed in a workmanlike
manner at the time of the DHCR's inspection or at any time prior to
the issuance of the Administrator's order.
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 April 24, 1987 and
that pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction
Regulations a rent reduction reflecting the reduced rental value of
the accomodation because of the decreased services was warranted.
Accordingly, the Commissioner further finds that the owner has
offered insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's
Upon a restoration of services the owner may separately apply
for a rent restoration.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York, it is,
ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
Joseph A. D'Agosta