CD 610221-RO
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.:
CD 610221-RO
BERNARD PUTTER,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER BF 610056-B
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 12, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review of an order issued on March
14, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 1540 Pelham Parkway, Bronx, New York,
Various Apartments, wherein the Administrator reduced the rent upon
a finding of decrease in services building-wide.
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 proceeding was commenced by the filing of a complaint on June
16, 1986 alleging a failure to provide certain services. On
October 9 and November 24, 1987 a Division staff member inspected
the premises. As a result of these inspections an order reducing
the rent was issued March 14, 1988 based on failure to provide
services building-wide.
In the PAR, the owner contends that none of the three conditions
listed in the Administrator's order make the tenants' individual
apartments uninhabitable, that none of the conditions cited were
actually complained of by the tenants, and, in any event, all
conditions were repaired prior to the issuance of the order. The
owner's submission includes copies of bills for various work
performed.
Several tenants responded to the owner's PAR citing a non working
intercom, poor janitorial service, trash left in the compactor
rooms, and "work in progress" that has left the building in a state
of disorder.
CD 610221-RO
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, a tenant
may apply to the Division for a reduction of the legal regulated
rent and the Division shall so reduce the rent where it is found
that the owner has failed to maintain required services. Required
services are not limited to those within the individual housing
accommodation nor must the condition render the individual living
space uninhabitable.
The tenants' complaint of June 16, 1986 cited, among other things,
pointing problems, serious leaks, and public areas not being
cleaned. The inspection report was prepared by a Division employee
who is neither a party to the proceeding nor an adversary of the
owner or tenants. The report was signed and dated and properly
placed in the record for the Administrator's consideration. The
inspection results included peeling paint and plaster and evidence
of water leaks in several places. The owner's PAR itself states
that after the ceilings were painted on or about February 25, 1987,
a new leak seeped through. This is consistent with the inspector's
findings.
On PAR, the owner submits bills and receipts for work he alleges
was performed prior to the issuance of the order. None of these
bills was submitted to the Rent Administrator or made part of the
record prior to the order.
Pursuant to Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code, review
of an order is limited to the facts or evidence before the Rent
Administrator. Since the owner has not established that said bills
cold not have been offered in the prior proceeding, they can not be
considered here. The Commissioner notes that one of the bills sub-
mitted is for the painting of the ceilings throughout the building
and is dated October 19, 1987. However, the subsequent physical
inspection of the building on November 24, 1987 revealed that the
necessary plastering and painting had not been done. The inspection
reports of October 9, 1987 and November 24, 1987 are consistent in
their findings of peeling paint and plaster. The subsequent
physical inspection also showed that the laundry room/floor had
been replaced with ceramic tile. While it was error for the Admin-
istrator to include this peeling paint on the laundry room floor as
a reason for the rent reduction, the other findings of the Rent
Administrator based on physical inspection were sufficient in
themselves to warrant the rent reduction of one guideline.
CD 610221-RO
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly
based his determination on the entire record, including the
physical inspections, and that pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the
Code, a rent reduction is warranted based on the finding that the
owner has failed to maintain required services. The Commissioner
also notes that an application to restore rent was made by the
owner and granted by the Division on June 5, 1991.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,
and the Rent Administrator's amended order issued on January 23,
1991 be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
