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.:
2860 DECATUR CORP. RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
c/o JOHN T. SATRIALE, DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 15, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
November 29, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodation known as 2860 Decatur Avenue, Bronx,
New York, Apartment 25-A, wherein the Administrator determined that
a reduction in rent was warranted based upon a reduction in ser-
The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered the portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced
the rent of apartment 25-A in the subject premises.
On January 11, 1988, the tenant, of Apartment 25-A filed a com-
plaint alleging, in pertinent part, that the owner failed to
maintain services in the subject apartment in that the bathroom
ceiling was about to fall down due to the effects of a leak.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint alleging that it has
always maintained services; that repairs are made without delay and
that all ceilings have been repaired.
A Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspection
conducted on October 5, 1988, revealed that a new bathroom sink was
installed by the tenant and that the bathroom ceiling was in a very
dangerous condition, in that it was about to fall.
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
the Rent Administrator erred because the bathroom ceiling was in
good condition and that the Rent Administration misdescribed the
subject apartment as 25-A, when it should have been designated
The petition was served on the tenants on January 27, 1989.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a
tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
(DHCR) for a reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level in
effect prior to the most recent guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR
shall so reduce the rent for the period for which it is found that
the owner has failed to maintain required services.
Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include re-
pairs and maintenance.
Concerning the petitioner-owner's assertion that the Administrator
misdescribed the subject apartment, the Commissioner finds that the
record lacks support for this contention. The tenant's application;
the owner's own answer, the inspection report and the appealed
order designate the subject apartment as 25-A and not 24-A.
The Commissioner has also considered and rejects the petitioner's
claim on appeal that the required repair was made prior to the
issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.
A copy of the tenant's complaint was mailed to the owner on
February 23, 1988, and the Rent Administrator's order was issued on
November 29, 1988.
It is apparent that the owner had approximately nine (9) months to
attend to the complained-of conditions, but had failed to do so
prior to the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.
The inspector's report clearly showed that even if the owner
attempted to correct the bathroom ceiling condition prior to the
issuance of the Rent Administrator's order, it had failed to do so
in a workmanlike manner.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered
insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's determi-
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 October 5, 1988, and that
pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, the Administrator was
mandated to reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had
failed to maintain services.
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.
Upon restoration of services the owner may separately apply for a
rent restoration and the rent reduction remains in effect until a
rent restoration application is filed and granted
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabili-
zation Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,
and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA