CA430016RT 





                                  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.: CF430016RT                                                                
                                        

          CLEO REDD                               RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: BF410128OR

                                  PETITIONER            
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
          On June 17, 1988 the above named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition 
          for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued June 10, 1988 concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as various apartments, 77 West 104 Street,
          New York, New York, wherein the Administrator granted in part the 
          owner's rent restoration application.
                         
          The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence of record and has 
          carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues raised on 
          appeal.

          A review of the record reveals that on June 25, 1987, the owner 
          filed an application to restore the rents that had been reduced for 
          all rent controlled tenants in the building  in an order issued on 
          January 11, 1974 in Docket No. 2T613454-478.  The rents had been 
          reduced based on a finding of failure to provide several essential 
          services.  The owner stated in the restoration application that 
          these services had been restored.  
            
          A physical inspection by DHCR on August 18, 1987 revealed that  the 
          mail boxes were secured and locked, a new roof had been installed 
          and pointing and waterproofing had been completed, and a new 
          laundry room had been built in the basement.  A partial rent 
          restoration was granted and the owner was advised to refile for the 
          remaining restoration after painting the hallways and stairways of 
          each floor; repairing the elevator, the hole in the wall, and the 












          CA430016RT 

          exposed wires; and providing a fire hose in the lobby.

          In the petition for administrative review, the tenant asserts that 
          the order is in error because the roofing and pointing are 
          ineffective and the leaks and water seepage continue, and that the 
          laundry room has not been operative or open for the past 4 years.

          The petition was served on the owner on August 10, 1988.  In 
          response, the owner stated that the roof, pointing and 
          waterproofing were done as confirmed by the DHCR inspection and 
          that according to DHCR "The laundry facility was built long after 
          these tenants were in residence.  In effect it is a bonus for all 
          the tenants who were already in residence, and therefore cannot be 
          cited as a reason for decreasing rent."

          After careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

          The Rent Administrator properly relied on the results of the 
          physical inspection which revealed that there was no evidence of 
          defective roof or exterior pointing or waterproofing, and that 
          there were three washing machines and two dryers provided and 
          working.  Based on this inspection, the Administrator properly 
          ordered a partial rent restoration.  The tenant's petition does not 
          establish any basis for modifying or revoking that determination.

          The owner did not file a petition for administrative review of this 
          order and did not identify the source of the language quoted in the 
          answer to the tenant's petition to the effect that laundry 
          facilities are not required to be provided.  A search of the 
          Division's records did not reveal any determination that a laundry 
          facility is not a base date service for this building.  This order 
          and opinion merely affirms the determination that laundry 
          facilities are provided and are operational.

          Therefore in accordance with the Rent Stabilization 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 affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                                             
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             Deputy Commissioner
                                  
    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name