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.: CL210063RO
Etem Bizati, : RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: CC210549S
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 5455 Kings Highway, Apartment 4F, Brooklyn,
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 petition.
The tenant commenced the proceeding below by filing a complaint on
March 25, 1988, asserting that the owner had failed to maintain
certain services in the subject apartment.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or otherwise asserted that all required repairs had been
or will be completed.
Thereafter an inspection of the subject building was conducted by
a D.H.C.R. inspector on August 26, 1988, who confirmed the
existence of the following defective conditions:
There was evidence of roach infestation in the kitchen.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner states, in
substance, that he has an exterminating contract for the building
and that the exterminating company has been denied access by the
The DHCR served a copy of the petition on the tenant on February
15, 1989. The tenant's answer states that the roaches still exist,
the exterminator needs to make regular visits and that the
exterminator advised that he is not allowed to spray the same area
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 owner states that the tenant has a roach infestation problem
because she has not allowed the exterminating company access to her
apartment. There are no attachments to the petition in support of
this allegation. Moreover, this assertion, which is raised for the
first time on appeal, is beyond the scope of administrative review.
The Administrator's order was properly based on an August 26, 1988
on-site inspection which confirmed the existence of roaches in the
apartment. Accordingly, the determination was in all respects
proper and is hereby sustained.
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so
warrant. The rent will not be restored until a rent restoration
application is filed and granted.
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