CB110190RO

                                  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.: CB110190RO

             HEN YAM LEE CORP.,                     RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                    DOCKET NO.: BG110215S
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------x

             ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On February 26, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          February 12, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 36-07 Steinway Street, Long Island 
          City, New York, Apt. 3-E, wherein the Administrator determined that 
          a reduction in rent was warranted based upon a reduction in 
          services.

          The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.

          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 rent of the subject apartment.

          On July 9, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner was not providing various services and repairs.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint on September 15, 1987, 
          alleging that all requisite repairs have been addressed and 
          subsequently corrected.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on December 11, 1987, revealed that:

                    1.  Peeling paint and plaster in bathroom.  Cracked 
                    bathroom wall, bathtub has been cemented in unworkmanlike 
                    manner, toilet tank pressure is inadequate, bathroom 
                    ceiling cracked, defective bathroom door lock.          

                    2.  Cracked living room walls.














          CB110190RO

                    3.  Kitchen walls uneven and in need of painting.

                    4.  Hallway walls in need of painting and plastering.

                    5.  Defective ceiling light (hazardous).

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the subject apartment was last painted in July 1985, within the 
          required three year period; that the light in question did not have 
          to be repaired because the tenant already repaired it; that it was 
          not informed by the tenant of any problem with the bathroom door 
          lock or water-pressure and that they were not required services.

          The petition was served on the tenant on March 28, 1988.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the Administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4 (a) of the Rent Stabilization Code,

                    "A tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and 
                    Community Renewal (DHCR) for a reduction of the legal 
                    regulated rent to the level in effect prior to the most 
                    recent guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR shall so 
                    reduce the rent for the period for which it is found that 
                    the owner has failed to maintain required services."

          Required services are defined in Section 2520.6 (r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

          A review of the record indisputably shows that the complained of 
          conditions and concomitant diminution of services existed at the  
          time of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) 
          inspection held on December 11, 1987, and at the time of the 
          issuance of the Rent Administrator's order on February 12, 1988.

          The record demonstrates that a Notice and Transmittal of Tenant's 
          Complaint was mailed to the owner on September 2, 1987 at the 
          owner's correct address.  The complaint listed "bathroom bad 
          condition" as one of the items requiring repair putting the owner 
          on notice of repairs required in the bathroom which the owner had 
          an obligation to investigate and correct.








          The owner's answer of September 15, 1987, stated, in essence, that 






          CB110190RO

          all necessary repairs had been addressed and corrected, but it 
          failed to raise the issues noted in the appeal concerning the date 
          of the last painting and repairs purportedly made by the tenant to 
          the light fixture.

          Since the scope of administrative review is limited to the facts or 
          evidence which were raised before the Rent Administrator and the 
          issues raised on appeal were not raised below, they may not now be 
          considered for the first time on administrative appeal.

          The owner had five months from the date of service of the tenant's 
          complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order to 
          investigate the tenant's complaint and to make the necessary 
          repairs, but failed to do so.

          Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly 
          based his determination on the entire record, including the results 
          of the on-site inspection conducted in the subject apartment.

          This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's 
          right to file the appropriate application with the Division for 
          restoration of rent based upon a restoration of services, if the 
          facts so warrant.

          The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted 
          by the filing of this petition is vacated upon the issuance of this 
          order and opinion

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is denied, and 
          that 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