STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                             DOCKET NO.: CC430148RO
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                DOCKET NO.: BF410068B       
          EDR Twelve of New York, Inc./      
          John J. Grogan & Associates/          PREMISES: 176 West 87th St.
          Time Equities, Inc.,                            New York, NY


               The above-named owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of order issued on December 31, 1987 
          concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above- 
          described docket number.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issues raised by the petition.

               This proceeding was commenced by various tenants filing a 
          complaint on June 9, 1987, asserting that the owner had failed to 
          maintain numerous services in the subject building, namely, that 
          the roof is desperately in need of repair or replacement; that the 
          outside walls must be waterproofed or pointed; that all windows 
          throughout the building have to be replaced; that the water tower 
          has to be replaced or repaired; that the canopy is ripped and must 
          be replaced; that the elevator services are not maintained; and 
          that the water pressure for hot/cold water services is inadequate.

               On August 31, 1987, the Division sent a copy of the tenants' 
          complaint to the owner.

               In an answer filed on October 7, 1987, the owner asserted that 
          many repairs had been performed and that work would be completed on 
          all the complained of conditions.



               On October 30, 1987, an on-site inspection of the subject 
          building was conducted by a Division staff member who reported that 
          the facade of the building requires water proofing or pointing; 
          that the public area windows need painting and caulking inside and 
          outside; and that the canopy has to be replaced.  The inspector 
          further found that a new roof has been installed, that the elevator 
          is in working order, and that repairs on the water tower are in 

               The Administrator directed the restoration of services and 
          ordered a reduction of the maximum legal rent by $2.50 per month, 
          i.e.: $1.00 for the building facade, $1.00 for the public area 
          windows, and $0.50 for the canopy.  The owner was also directed to 
          complete the repair of the water tower.

               In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends 
          that the tenants never complained about the facade of the building 
          and that the canopy is not a required service.

               On March 18, 1988, the Division mailed a copy of the owner's 
          petition to the tenants.  

               After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the 
          opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The owner's contention that the tenants never complained about 
          the building facade is without merit.  The owner was put on 
          sufficient notice of this condition by the tenants' complaint that 
          the outside walls must be waterproofed or pointed.  The October 30, 
          1987 inspection confirmed that this complained of condition had not 
          been repaired.

               Although the owner may not have registered the canopy as a 
          building service, all the parties agree that the canopy has been 
          provided by the owner to the tenants.  Nor is the owner's failure 
          to register same dispositive of the issue.  The owner has not 
          established that the canopy is not a base service which inspection 
          confirmed to be ripped and defective.  The owner's duty is thus to 
          repair or replace the canopy.




               The Commissioner thus finds that the Administrator properly 
          relied on the evidence in record, including the results of the 
          physical inspection which found defective conditions, warranting a 
          rent reduction.

               The owner's rent restoration application (DB430099OR) was 
          granted in part effective August 1, 1989. 
               THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction 
          Regulations, it is,

               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied 
          and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 


                                                  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