CK 430036 RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433


          ----------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: CK 430036 RO
                                                  
                                                  RENT
          PETER EVANGELISTA                       ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: CB 430023 B
                                  PETITIONER            
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
               On November 1, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner timely 
          refiled a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of 
          the Rent Administrator issued July 29, 1988. The order concerned 
          various housing accommodations located at 101 W. 77th Street, New 
          York, N.Y.  The Administrator ordered a rent reduction for failure 
          to maintain required services.  

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 
          appeal.

               This proceeding was commenced on February 9, 1988 when tenants 
          of 2 of the 24 apartments in the building filed a Statement of 
          Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide Services wherein they 
          alleged the following services deficiencies:

                    1.   Inadequate heat/hot water,

                    2.   Defective windows,

                    3.   Dirty hallways,

                    4.   Excessive noise from restaurant downstairs,

                    5.   No superintendent or regular janitorial service,

                    6.   Buzzer system not functioning for over 1 year,

                    7.   Exposed hall lights and outlets,

                    8.   Water leaks from ceiling on second and third 
                         floors; ceiling buckling,













          CK 430036 RO


                    9.   Inadequate supply of garbage cans for apartment,

                   10.   Rodent and ant infestation.
           
               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner failed to respond to the 
          complaint.
           
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on April 21, 1988 and 
          revealed the following:

                    1.   No superintendent on premises and no sign posting 
                         superintendent's name and address,

                    2.   Evidence of unpleasant odor in public hallways,

                    3.   Public hallway light fixtures missing covers,

                    4.   Hallway outlets do not have cover plates,

                    5.   Peeling paint and plaster and waterstains on second 
                         floor hallway ceiling,

                    6.   Inadequate hot water temperature,

                    7.   Fire escapes require scraping and painting,

                    8.   Ground floor window requires weather stripping.

          The following services were found to have been maintained:

                    1.   Public hall clean,

                    2.   Buzzer and intercom system repaired,

                    3.   Adequate number of garbage cans for building,

                    4.   No evidence of infestation.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on July 
          29, 1988.  A rent reduction of an amount equal to the most recent 
          guideline adjustment was ordered for rent stabilized tenants.  Rent 
          controlled tenants were granted a rent increase  equal to 7 1/2% of 
          the Maximum legal rent plus $10.00 per month.

               On appeal the owner states, "Although we have not received 
          prior notice of these complaints (before receiving the Order), most 
          of these items have been corrected and the remaining items are 
          being corrected promptly."  The tenants did not file responses.







          CK 430036 RO

               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner finds that the tenants' complaint was served 
          on the owner at the address set forth in DHCR records.  The 
          remainder of the owner's petition is a statement that most items 
          have been corrected and the remaining ones will be promptly 
          corrected.  This statement is insufficient to rebut the report of 
          the inspector.  Numerous prior decisions of the Commissioner have 
          held that such a report is entitled to greater probative weight 
          than the unsupported allegations of a party to the proceeding.

               Pursuant to 9 NYCRR 2523.4 a tenant may apply to the DHCR for 
          a rent reduction based on allegations that the owner is failing to 
          maintain required services.  The agency is required to reduce the 
          rent upon finding that services have been reduced.  Pursuant to 9 
          NYCRR 2520.6 (r) repairs and maintenance fall within the definition 
          of required services.  The Rent and Eviction Regulations for New 
          York City empower the Administrator to order a rent reduction based 
          on a finding that the owner is not providing required services in 
          an amount which reflects the reduction in the rental value of the 
          housing accommodations.  The Commissioner's sole determination in 
          considering this administrative appeal is whether the Administrator 
          was correct in issuing the order here under review based on the 
          record at the time of issuance.  The Commissioner finds that the 
          Administrator determined this matter based on the entire record 
          including the results of the on-site physical inspection which took 
          place on April 21, 1988.  The order here under review is affirmed.  
          The owner may file for rent restoration when services have been 
          fully restored.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code and 
          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, affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                                             
                                             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