STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 25, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a petition
for administrative review of an order issued on May 18, 1988 by the
Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation known as
1049 East 15th Street, building-wide, Brooklyn, N.Y., wherein the
Administrator determined that a rent reduction was not warranted
but directed the owner to repair the vestibule door lock.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced by the filing by several tenants of
a complaint of a decrease in services alleging numerous defective
conditions including that there is no vestibule door lock. A copy
of the tenants' complaint was served on the owner who denied the
tenants' complaints or responded that the required repairs have
been or will be made.
An inspection conducted by a DHCR staff inspector on March 15, 1988
determined that all the items in the complaint had been remedied
except that the vestibule door lock was defective. Accordingly the
Administrator issued the order directing that the defective door
lock be corrected but otherwise finding that a rent reduction was
In the PAR, the tenant disputes the inspection findings and states
that several items from the original complaint have still not been
repaired including the vestibule door lock.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
The tenant's petition does not establish any basis for modifying or
revoking the Administrator's order, which found that the tenants
were not entitled to rent reductions.
Based upon the record, the Administrator correctly relied upon the
report of the Division's inspector, who is not a party to this
proceeding, to determine the outcome in this case. The inspection
report indicated that all but one of the tenants' complaints had
been remedied. Such report must be given greater probative value
than the assertions of a party to the proceeding. As for the
condition remaining, based on results of the inspection which
failed to confirm the majority of complaints cited in the
complaint, and in light of the collective evidence of record which
suggested a course of conduct wherein the owner addressed defective
conditions promptly, the Administrator's decision, not to impose a
rent reduction for the remaining condition was not arbitrary,
improper, or an abuse of discretion.
This order is issued without prejudice to the right of the tenant
to file another complaint or application for a rent reduction under
the Rent Stabilization Law and Code if the facts so warrant.
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,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA