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.: CJ120060RO
Skaros Realty Corp., : RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: BL120113S
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
accommodations known as 37-06 72nd Street, Apartment 4F, Jackson
Heights, New York.
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 petition.
The tenant commenced the proceeding below by filing a complaint on
December 18,1987, asserting that the owner had failed to repair the
leak in her bedroom and that water has been pouring through the
light fixture and the ceiling in the bathroom.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or otherwise asserted that all required repairs had been
completed and an appointment had been set for painting and
Thereafter, on September 15, 1988, an inspection of the subject
apartment was conducted by a D.H.C.R. inspector who confirmed the
existence of the following defective condition:
Bathroom light fixture is water-stained.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of this service and
further ordered a $2.00 per month reduction of the maximum legal
In its petition for administrative review, the owner states, in
substance, that they have inspected the light fixture and that it
is not water-stained, and furthermore, the tenant made no reference
to the water-stained light fixture in her original written
The DHCR served a copy of the petition on the tenant on November
14, 1988. She answered that there was a leak from the fixture and
the bulb exploded. She further states that she was afraid of the
possibility of a fire because of the sparks and that the super has
changed the bulb and was not looking for water stains.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
The Commissioner has considered the owner's claim that the Rent
Administrator erred by reducing the rent of the tenant based on a
defective condition that was not in her original complaint, and
rejects this argument. The tenant's complaint states that water
comes through the light fixture.
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 September 15, 1988; that
pursuant to Section 2202.16 (a) of the Rent and Eviction
Regulation, the Administrator acted properly in reducing the rent
upon determining that the owner had failed to maintain essential
services which are defined in Section 2200.3 to include repairs,
maintenance, janitorial services, and removal of refuse.
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 essential services based on a physical
inspection confirming the existence of defective conditions in the
subject apartment for which a rent reduction is warranted.
The Division's records reveal that the rent has been restored.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
New York City, 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