DHCR Decisions
CB210018RT
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.:
CB210018RT
VALERIE SAINTROSSY,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
----------------------------------x BL210045HW
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On February 11, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
February 2, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 71 Orange Street, Apartment 12, Brooklyn,
New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined that heat and
hot water services in the subject apartment were adequate.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue raised by the administrative appeal.
The proceeding was commenced by the filing of a complaint of
decrease in heat/hot water services on December 1, 1987. A copy of
the tenant's complaint was served on the owner and the owner
responded stating that a new hot water heater was installed on
November 11, 1987, and new burners for the gas steam boiler were
installed on November 5, 1987 and that both heat and hot water
services were resumed.
Thereafter, in the course of processing the complaint, the Division
sent a post card to the tenant on which the tenant was asked to
confirm whether services had been restored. On December 30, 1987,
the tenant responded that the owner had restored heat/hot water
services. Despite such confirmation the Division nevertheless
conducted an inspection on January 20, 1988, which confirmed that
heat and hot water was being provided. Consequently the
Administrator issued its order February 2, 1988, denying the
tenant's complaint.
In the petition for administrative review, the tenant contends, as
she had in the complaint below, that the building was without heat
from November 29 through December 4, 1987 and without hot water
from November 5 through November 11, 1987, and that the single
inspection conducted by the Division does not take into account the
record of lack of services in this case.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
denied.
In the answer below, the owner confirmed that the heat and hot
water systems were down for repairs which were completed on
December 5, 1987 and November 11, 1987 respectively. During
processing of the complaint the tenant herself confirmed the
restoration of services prior to the issuance of the
Administrator's order. The resumption of services was also
confirmed by an inspection conducted by a Division employee.
Applicable law and code provide that where an owner has failed to
maintain services, a tenant may apply for a reduction of the legal
regulated rent. However, tenants are not entitled to rent
reductions for a temporary service interruption caused by repair to
a building system. The tenant, under these circumstances, is not
entitled to a rent reduction for the days when the building had no
heat or hot water. In addition, if prior to an inspection as in
this instance, the owner has restored the services referred to in
the tenant's complaint, then the tenant is likewise not entitled to
a rent reduction.
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,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|