CF 630189-RO
                                    STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:                  
          CF 630189-RO; 
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                   PETITIONER     BI 610018-B         


          On June 20, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition 
          for administrative review of an order issued on May 27, 1988, by 
          the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation known 
          as 2190 Boston Road, Bronx, New York, various apartments, wherein 
          the Administrator determined that the maximum legal rent for rent 
          controlled apartments should be reduced by $3.00 per month based 
          upon a diminution of services and further determined that the sole 
          complaining rent stabilized tenant was not entitled to a rent 
          reduction.  However, the owner was directed to restore services to 
          the required level by correcting the condition in question.  The 
          Rent Administrator's order was based upon an inspection held on 
          January 21, 1988, which showed inter alia, that the top floor wall 
          by the skylight is damaged due to an outside leak and that the 
          stairways were peeling paint and plaster.

          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 rents of various rent regulated apartments in the subject 
          building and whether the Rent Administrator properly directed a 
          restoration of services for Apartment 4-D.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted that it took title to the 
          premises on January 22, 1988, after the tenants had filed the 
          complaint of a decrease in building-wide services on August 26, 
          1987 and that as such it should not be held liable for a previous 
          owner's derelictions and further that not all tenants requested a 
          rent reduction.

          CF 630189-RO

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the Administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

          Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations provides that 
          an owner's failure to maintain services may result in an order of 
          decrease in maximum rent, in an amount determined by the discretion 
          of the Rent Administrator.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a 
          tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
          (DHCR) for a reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level in 
          effect prior to the most recent guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR 
          shall so reduce the rent for the period for which it is found that 
          the owner has failed to maintain required services.

          Required and essential services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) 
          and Section 2200.3(b) to include repairs and maintenance.

          The Commissioner has considered the owner's claims on appeal and 
          finds them to be without merit.

          A review of the file shows that the tenants' filed a complaint of 
          a decrease in building-wide services, on August 26,1987, and that 
          they applied for a rent reduction.  The box on the application form 
          (RA-84) is clearly checked; designating that a rent reduction was 
          requested.  The Commissioner notes, however, that even if the rent 
          controlled tenants did not check the box on the complaint form 
          requesting a rent reduction, it would not be material because pur- 
          suant to Section 2202.16 rent controlled tenants are not required 
          to apply for a rent reduction before qualifying for one.

          The owner's claim that a new owner should not be held responsible 
          for a prior owner's dereliction is also without basis.

          The record reflects that Boston Road Associates, Ltd. had partici- 
          pated in the appeal process holding itself out as the owner of the 
          premises, on June 15, 1988, to report on the status of the condi- 
          tions and repairs being effected in the building.

          The record also demonstrates that the owner took title to the 
          subject building on January 22, 1988 and that the complaint was 
          filed on September 11, 1987.

          CF 630189-RO

          As a new owner, Boston Road Associates, Ltd. had the responsibility 
          to obtain information from a prior owner regarding any tenant com- 
          plaints filed with the Division.  Such a new owner acquires title 
          to the premises subject to the rights and liabilities of its prede- 
          cessor in interest, and therefore remains responsible for remedying 
          any decrease in services determined by the Administrator.
          The Commissioner finds, therefore, that the petitioner is deemed to 
          have knowledge of the instant proceeding at the time it took owner- 
          ship of the premises.

          The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based his 
          determination on the entire record including the results of the on- 
          site physical inspection conducted on January 21, 1988 and that 
          pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations 
          the Rent Administrator acted within his discretion to reduce the 
          rents upon determining that the owner had failed to maintain 
          services.  The Rent Administrator also acted properly in directing 
          the owner to restore services to the rent stabilized tenant in 
          apartment 4-D.

          Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered 
          insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's deter- 

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and Evic- 
          tion Regulations for New York City and the Rent Stabilization Law 
          and Code, it is,

          ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          denied, and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby 
          is, affirmed.

          Upon a restoration of services the owner may separately apply for 
          a rent restoration.


                                                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