CD520035RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
GERTZ PLAZA
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
------------------------------------x
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: CD520035RO
WADSWORTH TERRACE CORP.,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: BJ520615S
PETITIONER
------------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 22, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner, filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) against an order issued on
March 23, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 46 Wadsworth Terrace, New York, N.Y., apt.
1-L, wherein the Administrator determined that the maximum legal
rent for the subject rent controlled apartment should be reduced by
$22.00 plus 10% of the maximum legal rent per month based upon a
diminution of services. The Rent Administrator's order was based
upon an inspection held on December 11, 1987. The Rent
Administrator also directed the restoration of all 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 rent controlled apartment.
The tenant filed a complaint on October 28, 1987 alleging that
repairs were required to the bathtub drain; the water damaged
ceilings in the kitchen, hall, and bathroom; the front door
peephole; the stove; the toilet, the mailbox and the infestation of
mice.
CD520035RO
In answer to the complaint, the owner asserted that all repairs
were done to the tenant's satisfaction. The owner submitted a work
order dated November 20, 1987 by the tenant regarding repairs to
the front door, sink, washstand, bathtub drain, stove and wall
lamps.
The inspection held on December 11, 1987, demonstrated that the
following services were not being maintained:
1. Ceilings throughout are peeling paint and
plaster.
2. Continuous water leakage from kitchen
ceiling.
3. Apartment front door is difficult to open
and close.
4. Roach and rodent infestation.
5. Defective toilet flushometer.
6. Defective mailbox.
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that all necessary repairs
were completed in a workmanlike manner and that the tenant signed
a work order attesting to this fact.
The petition was served on the tenant on May 23, 1988 and on May
25, 1988, the tenant filed an answer to the petition stating that
the apartment was in a state of disrepair; that very few repairs
were completed by the owner and that due to illness and disability
she had mistakingly signed the owner's work order.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
For rent controlled tenants, Section 2202.16 of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations provides that a finding that an owner failed
to maintain services may result in an order of decrease in maximum
rent, in an amount determined by the discretion of the Rent
Administrator.
CD520035RO
The owner consistently alleged, both below and on appeal, that all
necessary repairs were corrected in a workmanlike manner and in
support of this contention it produced a work order signed by the
tenant.
The tenant, however, contradicted the owner's assertions alleging
that the owner failed to make most repairs and that the work order
was signed in error.
The owner's petition does not establish any basis for revoking the
Administrator's order, which determined that the owner was not
maintaining services based on a physical inspection confirming the
existence of defective conditions in the subject apartment for
which a rent reduction is warranted. The work order on which the
owner relies was repudiated by the tenant and in any event does not
mention most of the items listed in the tenant's complaint and
confirmed by the inspection.
If the conditions were corrected prior to the issuance of the order
under review, the owner offered no credible evidence to
substantiate the allegation before the Administrator. If the
conditions were corrected after the issuance date, the
determination was proper.
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so
warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
New York City, 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
|
