CG510005RO
                                  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.: CG510005RO
                    
                  G. ZATUZHNI                                                
                                                     RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                     DOCKET NO.: CC510116S   
                            PETITIONER
          -------------------------------------x

          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On July 1, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition 
          for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on June 2, 1988, 
          by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation 
          known as 870 St. Nicholas Avenue, New York, N.Y., wherein the 
          Administrator determined that a reduction in rent was warranted 
          based upon a reduction in 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 March 4, 1988, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner failed to maintain services.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint on March 20, 1988, 
          alleging in pertinent part, that all necessary repairs were made to 
          the subject apartment.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on April 12, 1988, revealed the 
          following:

                              1.   Apartment front door does not close properly - lock 
                         defective.

                    2.   Living room ceiling is bulging-leak damage and 
                         peeling paint and plaster.

                    3.   Refrigerator fresh food compartment is 35 degrees. 
                         Frozen food compartment is 28 degrees.















          CG510005RO


                    4.   Door leading from living room to bedroom has a 
                         broken pane.  Kitchen door is missing.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          he was not notified of the proceedings below because the Rent 
          Administrator mailed the notice of proceedings to the incorrect 
          address and that all necessary repairs were made.

          The petition was served on the tenant on August 23, 1988 and on 
          August 27, 1988, the tenant filed an answer to the petition stating 
          that although some repairs were made by the owner, they were made 
          in an unworkmanlike manner.

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

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4 (a) of the Rent Stabilization Code,

               "A tenant may apply to the DHCR for a reduction of the legal 
               regulated rent to the level in effect prior to the most recent 
               guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR shall so reduce the rent 
               for the period for which it is found that the owner has failed 
               to maintain required services."

          Required services are defined in Section 2520.6 (r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

          The record shows that not only was the owner notified of the 
          proceedings before the Rent Administrator but it had actually filed 
          an answer on March 20, 1988.

          Accordingly, having been a full participant in the proceedings 
          below, the owner may not now claim lack of notice.

          The DHCR inspection conducted on April 12, 1988, demonstrated that 
          the owner was not maintaining required services.

          It is clear that the owner had adequate notice of the proceedings 
          before the Rent Administrator and that he was accorded sufficient 
          time to complete all repairs but had failed to do so.










          The Commissioner finds, therefore, that the petitioner was not 






          CG510005RO

          deprived of its due process rights and that the Administrator 
          properly based the determination on the entire record, including 
          the results of the on-site inspection conducted in the subject 
          building.

          Upon a restoration of services the owner may separately apply for 
          rent restoration.

          The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted 
          by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this 
          order and opinion.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          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