CB130248RO
                                  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.: CB130248RO
                                                  
               CRYSTAL GARDENS ASSOCIATES         RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: BG130036B
                                  PETITIONER            
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
               On February 4, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued January 5, 1988. The order concerned housing 
          accommodations located at 190-25 Woodhull Avenue, Hollis, N.Y..  
          The Administrator directed restoration of services and further 
          ordered a reduction of the stabilized legal rents.

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 
          appeal.

               This proceeding was commenced on July 9, 1987 when 30 of the 
          110 tenants of the subject building joined in the filing of a 
          Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide Services 
          wherein they alleged the following services deficiencies:

                    1.   Dirty hallway floors and stairwells,

                    2.   Dirty incinerator rooms; garbage chutes too small,

                    3.   Hallway walls dirty and in need of painting,

                    4.   Elevators out of order,

                    5.   Laundry room not kept in clean and sanitary 
                         condition; dirty machines, table and floor; laundry 
                         room open to public,

                    6.   Entrance doors in need of repair; front entrance 
                         door glass window cracked,

                    7.   Garbage, refuse and wastes not removed from front 
                         of building over weekends.












          CB130248RO

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner failed to file a response.    
             
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on November 20, 1987 and 
          revealed the following:

                    1.   Hallways and stairwell walls in poor condition, 
                         holes in walls, peeling paint and plaster,

                    2.   Elevator has broken glass windows throughout,

                    3.   Entrance door glass cracked and broken.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on 
          January 5, 1988 and ordered a rent reduction equal to the most 
          recent guideline adjustment based on the inspector's report. 

               On appeal the owner, through counsel, states that it was never 
          served with a copy of the complaint.  It then proceeds to raise 
          certain arguments in requesting that the order here under review be 
          reversed.  Various tenants filed responses to the petition and 
          stated that the petition should be denied and the order should be 
          affirmed, because repairs have not been done.

               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner notes that the scope of review in an 
          administrative appeal is limited to facts or evidence submitted to 
          the Rent Administrator unless such facts or evidence could not have 
          been so presented.  The owner did not respond to the complaint.  
          The Commissioner finds that the complaint was properly served on 
          the registered owner at the proper address as indicated by DHCR 
          records.  Since the owner is presumed to have had notice of this 
          proceeding and did not respond, the claims that the owner raises 
          for the first time on appeal are beyond the scope of review of this 
          appeal and cannot be considered.

               The Commissioner notes that, pursuant to Section 2523.4 (a) a 
          tenant may apply for a rent reduction and the DHCR shall reduce the 
          rent upon a finding of failure to maintain required services.  
          Repairs and maintenance are within the definition of required 
          services.  The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly 
          based these determinations on the entire record, including the 
          results of the on-site physical inspection which took place on 
          November 20, 1987, and which revealed a failure to maintain 
          services for which a rent reduction is warranted.  The order here 
          under review is affirmed.

               The Commissioner notes that the owner filed for rent 
          restoration and that application was denied on December 27, 1990 in 






          CB130248RO

          an order bearing Docket No. EJ130003OR.  The owner may reapply for 
          rent restoration when services have been completely restored.  

               It is also noted that the enforcement and effectuation of this 
          order was stayed by order of the Supreme Court dated April 26, 1988 
          (DiTucci, J., Index No. 3580-88) pending a final judicial 
          determination reversing, modifying or affirming said order.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to 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