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.: CB110188RO
Hen Yam Lee Corp./ DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
Edwin J. Lee, DOCKET NO.: BG110354S
PETITIONER PREMISES: 36-07 Steinway St.
Apt. No. 2B
Long Island City
-----------------------------------X New York
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
IN PART AND MODIFYING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on January 27, 1988 concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by this administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on July 17, 1987 by the tenant filing
a complaint asserting that the windows throughout the apartment are
defective; that the bathroom ceiling is collapsing; and that the
refrigerator needs to be replaced.
The Division transmitted to the owner on August 19, 1987 a copy of
the tenant's complaint.
In an answer filed on September 8, 1987, the owner asserted that
"all of the tenant's complaints and grievances have been addressed
and repaired to the tenant's satisfaction."
Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the subject building was
conducted on December 15, 1987 by a Division staff member who
reported the following:
1. In the living room left window, the top sash
does not open, the lock is inoperative, the
bottom storm window pane is cracked and loose;
2. In the living room right window, the lock is
inoperative, the top sash does not open, the
right chain is missing, the storm window sashes
3. In the kitchen, one window is missing a storm
window pane, the screen is broken, the lock is
missing, the top sash does not open, both storm
window sashes are loose, the window molding has
an opening between wall and molding;
4. In one window of the bedroom, the bottom pane
of the storm window is cracked, the sash is
missing, the lock is inoperative, the top sash
does not open;
5. In the bathroom, the ceiling is cracked, un-
even, slightly discolored due to water seepage,
part of the ceiling is about to fall;
6. The door of the refrigerator freezer is miss-
7. The apartment entrance door frame is rotted,
there is a hold in the door making the door
The Administrator directed restoration of services and further
ordered a reduction of the stabilized rent.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends
without any attachment or proof that he received no written notice
of the tenant's complaint; that the windows are functional, despite
defective window locks and a missing widow chain; that a cracked
window pane is not a housing code violation; that the defective
bathroom ceiling is a result of temporary repairs at that time; that
the tenant's lack of due care caused the broken freezer door; that
the item concerning the defective apartment entrance door and the
hole was not part of the original tenant's complaint; and that all
of these conditions were corrected.
On March 28, 1988, the Division mailed a copy of the owner's
petition to the tenant.
In an answer filed on April 6, 1988, the tenant asserts in substance
that the complained of conditions as verified by the December 15,
1987 on-site inspection continue to exist, and that he considered
unfair the owner's offer to install replacement windows because it
was condition on a monetary contribution from the tenant.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be granted in part to the extent of omitting
from the Administrator's order the finding of a defective apartment
entrance door; and that in all other respects, the order appealed
from is sustained.
The record establishes that the item in the order about a rotten
apartment entrance door frame and a hole in the door was not in the
tenant's original complaint and should therefore be omitted from the
In all other respects, the Administrator's determination was based
upon a staff inspector's report which found defective conditions
within the apartment, and is hereby sustained.
The owner cannot claim that he was not notified of the tenant's
complaint when in fact he answered the same below, with the
unsupported allegation, belied by the on-site inspection, that "all
of the tenant's complaints and grievances have been addressed and
repaired to the tenant's satisfaction".
All other contentions by the owner concerning the numerous and
egregious conditions confirmed by inspection were not raised in the
proceeding below prior to the issuance of the Administrator's order
and are now raised for the first time on appeal. Accordingly, these
assertions in the petition are beyond the scope of administrative
review which is limited to the issues and evidence before the
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
by the filing of the petition is vacated upon issuance of this Order
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted in
part to the extent of omitting from the order appealed from the
finding of a defective apartment entrance door; and that in all
other respects, the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA