STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
Eastwood Towers Co.,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named petitioner-owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodation known as 355 East 72 St, Apt. 21C, New York, N.Y.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the petition.
The tenant commenced the proceeding below by filing a complaint on
October 26, 1987, asserting that the owner had failed to correct a
leak which has caused damage to the ceilings in the apartment and
subsequently caused peeling paint and plaster.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or otherwise asserted that after a visual inspection of
the premises, there was no present water problem in the apartment,
the apartment is dry, and that all apartment repairs were made
sometime ago. The tenant replied that the owner did not inspect
Thereafter, an inspection of the subject apartment was conducted by
a DHCR inspector on May 4, 1988, who confirmed the existence of the
following defective condition:
Peeling paint and plaster throughout the Livingroom,
Diningroom, Bedroom and on the main closet ceilings.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.
In its petition for administrative review, dated August 12, 1988,
the owner states in substance, that the tenant never put in a
request for the apartment to be plastered and painted.
The DHCR served a copy of the petition on the tenant on September
27, 1988. The tenant answered that the owner had not offered to
restore services and had in fact refused to restore the services
addressed in the complaint.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is
required to order the rent reduction, upon application by the
tenant, where it is found that the owner has failed to maintain
required services. The owner's petition does not establish any
basis for modifying or revoking the Administrator's order which
determined that the owner was not maintaining required services
based on a physical inspection confirming the existence of
defective conditions in the subject apartment for which a rent
reduction is warranted.
The Administrator's order was properly based on the May 4, 1988
on-site inspection which confirmed the existence of peeling paint
and plaster on the ceilings throughout the apartment. This
condition is sufficiently related to the tenant's complaint of leak
damage and established that adequate repairs were not made.
Accordingly, the determination was in all respects proper and is
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this
order and opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, 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,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA