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.: CC610108RO
COLLEGE MANAGEMENT CO.,INC. RENT
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 17, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued February 28, 1988 concerning the housing
accommodations known as Apt. 18A, 1020 Grand Concourse, Bronx, NY,
wherein the Administrator determined that the owner was not
maintaining required services, directed restoration of such
services, and ordered a rent reduction.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence of record and has
carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues raised on
A review of the record reveals that the tenant filed a complaint on
July 16, 1987 alleging a decrease in certain services.
Specifically, the tenant stated that there is no heat in the
bathroom, that the faucets in the kitchen and bathroom are leaking,
that one of the closet doors does not close, that the countertops
need to be replaced, that there is no air conditioning, that the
windows in the living room and bedroom do not close properly, and
that the buzzer for another apartment constantly rings in the
The complaint was served on the owner on October 7, 1987. In
response, the owner stated that all repairs were made except for
the countertop which the owner alleged was damaged by the tenant's
own neglect and would not be repaired by the owner. The owner
enclosed with the answer a copy of a work order signed by the
tenant on November 17, 1987 stating that the faucets were replaced,
a new closet door track was installed, and the bathroom heater was
A physical inspection of the premises by DHCR on December 17, 1987
revealed that the closet door had been repaired but the molding was
broken; that the kitchen countertop was warped, cracked and
chipped; that the living room windows allow air seepage and are
out-of-line and the two bedroom windows permit air seepage; and
that the intercom has excessive static. All other conditions cited
in the tenant's complaint were found to have been corrected.
Based on the inspector's report the Rent Administrator issued the
rent reduction order appealed herein.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts that
the repairs were done by the superintendent on November 17, 1987
and the tenant signed the work order showing completion. The owner
adds that it is not its policy to replace worn countertops and that
the tenant complained that the windows do not close properly and
not that they were out of line and permit air seepage.
The petition was served on the tenant on May 20, 1988. The tenant
did not file an answer but did submit a non-compliance statement on
April 15, 1988 stating that only the buzzer and intercom are
working but that the other conditions have not been corrected.
After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code requires DHCR to
order a rent reduction on a finding that the owner is not
maintaining required services. The order appealed herein was
properly based on a physical inspection confirming the existence of
defective conditions for which a rent reduction is warranted. The
owner's petition does not establish any basis for modifying or
revoking the order.
The work order signed by the tenant and submitted by the owner does
not refer to the conditions which the inspector found to be
uncorrected. The broken closet door molding indicates that the
repairs to the closet door were not done in a complete and
workmanlike manner. The tenant is entitled to replacement of a
worn out countertop and the owner may not avoid this obligation
merely by stating that it has a policy of not replacing such items.
The tenant's complaint stated that the windows did not close
properly, and that this was a problem particularly in the winter,
which sufficiently put the owner on notice of the possibility of
air seepage, regardless of the cause.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that
resulted by the filing of the petition is vacated upon issuance of
this order and opinion.
The owner is advised to file a rent restoration application if the
facts so warrant.
Therefore in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED that this petition be and the same hereby is denied and the
Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA