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.: CC110218RO
PLAZA REALTY INVESTORS DOCKET NO.: BG110316S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on February 11, 1988
concerning the housing accommodation known as 105-25 65th Avenue,
Queens, New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined that
certain conditions in the tenant's apartment constituted services
decreases. The owner's appeal was served on the tenant.
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 the petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in
the subject apartment.
In an answer dated September 16, 1987, the owner denied
several allegations set forth in the complaint or otherwise
asserted that required repairs had been or will be completed.
An inspection of the subject apartment was conducted on
December 28, 1987 by a D.H.C.R inspector, who observed that the
apartment was infested with roaches, that there were no window
screens, that bathroom tiles had rust stains, that the bathtub
water was rusty, that doors in several kitchen cabinet doors were
defective, and that the hot water temperature (100 degrees F.) was
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services
and further ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.
In the petition, the owner states, in substance, the owner had
submitted paid bills, as well as notarized affidavits from repair
persons, the managing agent, and service contractors, stating that
repairs had been made or that services were being provided. The
owner ignores, however, that several conditions persisted at the
time of inspection some months after the owner's alleged repairs.
Concerning the owner's argument that several of the conditions
cited below were not cited in City administrative proceedings, and
were disposed of without a rent reduction in proceedings litigated
in the Queens Housing Court, the Commissioner notes that different
laws and requirements are involved in the tenant's services
complaint before the DHCR, and those raised in City administrative
and Housing Court proceedings, although some issues may overlap.
The owner's suggestion on appeal that the tenant did not avail
herself of extermination services provided by the owner was not
presented to the Administrator for his consideration, and
consequently is outside the scope of review.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code,
DHCR is required to order the rent reduction, upon application by
the tenant, where it is found that the owner has failed to maintain
required services. The owner's petition does not establish any
basis for modifying or revoking the Administrator's order which
determined that the owner was not maintaining required services.
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that
resulted by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of
this order and opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, 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.
Joseph A. D'Agosta