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.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 24, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a peti-
tion for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on March
14, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 19 Dongan Place, New York, New York, Apart-
ment 5-C, wherein the Administrator determined that a reduction in
rent was warranted based upon a reduction in services.
The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that 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 the subject apartment.
On July 24, 1987, one rent controlled tenant filed a complaint al-
leging that there was a diminution in services.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on October 14, 1987,
alleging that all service deficiencies enumerated in the complaint
have been corrected with the exception of the splintered and
unpainted window sills, which will be corrected in the near future.
A Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspection
conducted on December 18, 1987, revealed that the windows have not
been painted on the outside and that the outside sills were
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
new windows have been installed in the subject apartment on March
11, 1988, and that the $5.00 reduction in rent should therefore, be
After careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
For rent controlled tenants, Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Evic-
tion Regulations provides that a finding that an owner failed to
maintain services may result in an order of decrease in maximum
rent, in an amount determined by the discretion of the Rent Admin-
A review of the file reveals that a Notice and Transmittal of
Tenant's Complaint was mailed to the owner on October 13, 1987, and
that the owner's answer filed on October 21, 1987, indicated that
the window repairs were to be made sometime in the future.
The inspection of December 18, 1987, confirmed that these repairs
were still not made as of this date.
A review of the record before the Administrator clearly shows that
the owner did not submit any evidence that the deficiencies noted
on the inspector's report were completed in a workmanlike manner at
the time of the DHCR's inspection or at any time prior to the
issuance of the Administrator's order.
The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based the
determination on the entire record, including the results of the
on-site physical inspection conducted on December 18, 1987, and
that pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction
Regulations the Administrator was authorized to reduce the rent
upon determining that the owner had failed to maintain services.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered
insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's determina-
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Eviction
Regulations for New York, it is
ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby, is affirmed.
Upon a restoration of services, the owner may separately apply for
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA