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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:              
                   JASPER ASSOCIATES,      
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                   PETITIONER     BJ410032B

                                       IN PART

          The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
          review (PAR) of an order issued on November 2, 1988, concerning the 
          housing accommodations known as 45 Tiemann Place, New York, 
          New York, wherein the Administrator determined that certain 
          conditions found in the subject building constituted services 

          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 this proceeding by filing a complaint as- 
          serting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in 
          the subject building.

          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 premises was conducted by 
          a Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspector who 
          confirmed that floor tiles were cracked along the length of the 
          lobby, that the building entrance door marble saddle was cracked 
          and that the sidewalk concrete had cracks.  The majority of the 
          conditions cited in the complaint were not confirmed or were found 
          to have been repaired.

          The Rent Administrator directed a restoration of these services, 
          and ordered a reduction of the control rents only.     


          In the petition for administrative review, the owner argues, in 
          substance, that the order herein under appeal was inconsistent with 
          a prior order wherein the Administrator did not impose a rent 
          reduction for the same defective conditions, in that the conditions 
          were minor items not warranting rent reductions and that the 
          failure to give notice of the inspection or the results was incon- 
          sistent with the Division's then practice and constituted a denial 
          of due process.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petition should be granted in part.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is 
          required to order a rent reduction upon application by a tenant, 
          where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required 
          services.  Under Section 2202.16 of the Rent & Eviction Regula- 
          tions, DHCR may order a rent reduction where it is found that an 
          owner has failed to maintain essential services, which may include 
          but are not limited to repairs, decorating and maintenance, among 
          other items.

          The owner's claim that the order below was inconsistent with sepa- 
          rate prior proceedings, commencing with Docket No. USC00101B and 
          processed through various administrative appeals, rent restoration 
          proceedings and judicial appeals (ART00148U; BC430142OR; SJR No. 
          3390; BC530444RO; BD410042RT through BD410052RT), is not accurate.  
          Final determinations in those proceedings reflected that a defec- 
          tive marble door saddle and cracked lobby floor tiles were not de 
          minimis, constituted services decreases, and warranted rent reduc- 

          The Commissioner finds, however, that the $4.00 per month rent 
          reduction, granted to rent controlled tenants for the defective 
          marble door saddle and cracked lobby floor, was duplicative of a 
          rent reduction granted in the order per Docket No. ART0748U, dated 
          January 23, 1985, amending the underlying Administrator's order per 
          Docket No. USC00101B.  It is further noted that they, and the re- 
          lated proceedings, culminated in an order pursuant to remand, per 
          Docket No. BD420064RP, dated June 24, 1991, that restored the rent 
          controlled rent by $4.00 per month effective July 1, 1991 based on 
          the results of an inspection conducted on May 29, 1991 that found 
          that the conditions had been corrected. 


          The owner's petition does not show any basis for modifying or 
          revoking that part of the Administrator's order that granted a 
          $2.00 rent reduction for cracks in the sidewalk concrete, based on 
          August 29, 1988 and October 7, 1988 inspections of the subject 
          premises.  Records do reveal that the Rent Administrator issued an 
          order on February 27, 1992 per Docket No. FD410288OR that denied a 
          rent restoration for this item.

          Concerning the owner's claim that it was denied due process because 
          it was not given the notice of the inspection or copies of the 
          reports, the Commissioner notes that due process does not require 
          that notice or an opportunity to respond.  The owner was afforded 
          due process rights by service of the tenants' complaint.

          If partial rent arrears are due the owner from the rent controlled 
          tenants as a result of this order, they shall be paid in monthly 
          installments equal to the number of months the tenants' rent reduc- 
          tion was in effect.

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

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted, in 
          part, to the extent of amending the Administrator's order to revoke 
          as duplicative the rent reduction granted to controlled tenants 
          based on findings of a defective door saddle and cracked lobby 
          tiles. The rent reduction predicated on sidewalk cracks 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