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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:              
                 SILMAN REALTY COMPANY,          
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                   PETITIONER     CB630010B 


          On September 28, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          timely petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued 
          on August 24, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodations known as various apartments, at 1120 Wyatt 
          Street, Bronx, New York, wherein the Administrator determined that 
          the owner was not maintaining certain services, directed restora- 
          tion of such services, and ordered a rent reduction.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issues raised by the administrative appeal.

          The record reveals that on February 1, 1988, 57 tenants of the 98 
          apartments in the subject building joined in filing a complaint of 
          decrease in building-wide services.  Specifically, the tenants 
          alleged that there is inadequate heat and hot water, the elevator 
          frequently stops because the fuse blows, there are rats all over 
          the building, there are cracked windows in the halls which are a 
          hazard to children, the lock on the front door is constantly 
          broken, the radiators have been removed from the halls and the 
          building is cold, and the intercom is not working.

          In answer to the complaint, the owner stated that the elevator is 
          adequately maintained pursuant to a service contract, that extermi- 
          nation services are provided on a regular basis, that some of the 
          hallway windows are cracked but they are safety glass and do not 
          pose any hazard, that the lock on the front door is changed when 


          broken, that radiators in the halls are not necessary because there 
          are risers which serve the same purpose, and that the intercom is 
          repaired as needed.  The owner submitted copies of various receipts 
          and service contracts in support of the answer.

          A physical inspection by DHCR on March 25, 1988, revealed that hot 
          water was being provided but heat was not required on that day, the 
          elevator was operable, there was no evidence of rat infestation in 
          the public areas, there were cracked window panes on the 2nd, 3rd, 
          4th, 5th and 6th floors, the front door lock was not defective, the 
          radiators in the public hallways have been removed and the intercom 
          is not defective.

          A second inspection on May 27, 1988 revealed that the radiators 
          were still missing from the public hallways, heat was not required 
          because the outside temperature was 82@, and there were two cracked 
          windows - one on the first floor and one on the sixth floor.

          Based on this inspection report, the Rent Administrator issued 
          orders on August 24, 1988 reducing the rent for all rent controlled 
          tenants in the building by $19.00 per month for all stabilized 
          tenants who signed the complaint, the rent was reduced by the 
          percentage of the most recent guidelines adjustment.

          In the petition for administrative review, the owner, through 
          counsel, asserts that radiators have not been used to heat the 
          hallways for twenty-five years, that risers provide adequate heat, 
          and that the windows were corrected prior to the issuance of the 
          challenged order.  The owner submitted copies of bills for window 
          repairs made in March and April 1988.

          Numerous tenants filed an identical response in which they conceded 
          that the hallway windows have been taken care of but the windows in 
          individual apartments are defective.  The tenants' answer made no 
          mention of the hallway radiators but asserted that other conditions 
          mentioned in the complaint remain defective and were not properly 
          inspected by DHCR.

          After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the Commis- 
          sioner is of the opinion that the owner's petition should be 
          granted and the rent reduction orders should be revoked.

          The tenants complained that the public hallways of the building are 
          cold because the radiators had been removed.  The owner responded 
          that the halls are adequately heated by risers.  The two inspectors 


          by the Division failed to reveal inadequate heat.  The absence of 
          radiators does not warrant a rent reduction if adequate heat is 
          being provided by some other source.  There was no finding in the 
          instant proceeding that the public hallways were not being heated 
          to the required temperature.

          With regard to the windows, the first inspection found numerous 
          cracked window panes on every floor except the first.  The owner 
          claimed that as a result of the complaint, a comprehensive effort 
          was made to replace all cracked windows throughout the building.  
          The second inspection, which found only two cracked panes, one on 
          the first floor and one on the sixth, confirms that the conditions 
          reported in the first inspection were substantially repaired but 
          new conditions appeared, of which the owner was never given notice.  
          In this condition, a rent reduction is also not warranted.

          The Division's records reveal that the owner's rent restoration 
          application was granted on May 30, 1989 (Docket No. CI630164OR).

          Rent controlled tenants may pay any arrears due as a result of this 
          order in installments of $19.00 per month.  Stabilized tenants may 
          pay such arrears in six equal monthly installments.  It is noted, 
          however, that the automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement 
          for rent stabilized tenants that resulted by the filing of the 
          petition is vacated upon issuance of this Order and Opinion.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted, 
          and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby, is 


                                                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