CH220133RO

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433





          ------------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.:
                                                       CH220133RO
                    Eunice S. Matthew,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.:
                                                       BK220079B
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------x

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On August 10, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on July 
          29, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 132 Lafayette Avenue, Brooklyn, N.Y., 
          various apartments, wherein the Administrator determined that a 
          reduction in rent was warranted for Apartment 2-F, a rent 
          controlled apartment, based upon a reduction in services.

          However, the rent stabilized apartments were found not to warrant 
          a rent reduction.  In the latter case, the owner was directed to 
          restore services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all 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 November 17, 1987, the tenants filed a building-wide complaint 
          alleging that the owner failed to maintain building-wide services.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint on January 9, 1988, 
          alleging that the building is constantly maintained and that the 
          hallways do not have cracked or falling plaster throughout the 
          building.  The owner further stated that the hallways are repaired 
          when found to be in disrepair.














          CH220133RO

          A DHCR inspection conducted on February 24, 1988, revealed that 
          building-wide services were substantially restored except for the 
          public halls, which were found to be cracked and in need of 
          painting.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the inspector erred and that the public halls were constantly 
          maintained and that they were restored whenever necessary.

          The petition was served on the tenants on October 6, 1998 and on 
          October 11, 1988 the tenant of Apartment 2-F filed an answer to the 
          petition stating that although some work was done on the public 
          halls they were still in a state of disrepair.

          After a 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 
          Eviction Regulations provides that a finding that an owner failed 
          to maintain essential services may result in an order of decrease 
          in maximum rent, in an amount determined by the discretion of the 
          Rent Administrator.  Essential services are defined in Section 
          2200.3 to include repairs and maintenance.

          The inspection held on February 24, 1988, demonstrates that the 
          walls of the public hall required repairs.

          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 February 24, 1988, 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 
          determination.






          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is






          CH220133RO


          ORDERED, that the owner'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 
          rent restoration.

             


          ISSUED:






                                                                     
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             Deputy Commissioner