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.:
RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT CO., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 24, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition
for administrative review of an order issued on June 2, 1988, by
the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation known
as 1001 Grand Concourse, Bronx, New York, various tenants wherein
the Administrator directed the owner to restore services and
determined that the maximum legal rent for various rent controlled
apartments should be reduced by $2.00 per month based upon a
diminution of services. The Rent Administrator's order was based
upon an inspection held on March 23, 1988, which showed that the
sidewalk was cracked in various places and that the lobby couch had
a split in the seating. No rent reduction was ordered for rent
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 order of the Rent Administrator is
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that all services which
were the subject of the appealed reduction order have been
The petition was served on the tenant representative on August 22,
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
On August 8, 1987, the tenants filed a building-wide complaint of
decrease in services.
On November 9, 1987, the owner filed an answer to the complaint
alleging that most of the work has been completed and that the rest
is in progress.
The inspection held on March 23, 1988, revealed that not all
repairs had been made.
After the issuance of the appealed order, the owner filed an Affi-
davit of Compliance on June 24, 1988 in which it asserted that
those services set forth in the Rent Administrator's rent reduction
order have been restored.
The tenants' representative filed a statement on September 23,
1988, claiming that the repairs to the sidewalk and the lobby couch
were completed in an unworkmanlike manner.
The record including the physical inspection demonstrates that the
petitioner had failed to make all of the required repairs prior to
the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order; despite the fact
that it had seven months from the date of service of the tenants'
complaint until the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order to
act on the tenants' complaint and to make the necessary repairs.
Therefore, the Commissioner finds that the Rent Administrator
properly relied on the results of the inspection; and that based
thereon, the Rent Administrator properly determined that the owner
had failed to maintain services.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
right to file the appropriate restoration application with the DHCR
based upon the restoration of services, if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and 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