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.:
Dyckman Associates c/o Parkoff Management,
DOCKET NO.: CD510052HW
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On August 19, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on July
14, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 2-12 Seaman Avenue, New York, New York,
Apt. 4-1, wherein the Administrator determined that a reduction in
rent was warranted based upon a reduction in hot-water services.
The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of 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 April 15, 1988, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the
owner was not maintaining hot water services.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint alleging that the
tenant's complaint was not true because hot-water is provided to
A Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspection
conducted on June 21, 1988, revealed that the hot-water temperature
in the kitchen was inadequate.
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
work on the hot water boiler was completed at the time of the
inspection and that the inspector erred because only the kitchen
hot-water was found to be wanting and that the inspection report
failed to specify a specific water temperature.
The petition was served on the tenant on October 11, 1988 and on
October 24, 1988, the tenant filed an answer to the petition
stating that hot-water services had not been corrected.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a
tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
(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 heat
and hot water.
Housing Maintenance Code regulations relating to supply of hot
water provide as follows:
Section 27-2031 Supply of hot water when required:
Except as otherwise provided in this article, every bath,
shower, washbasin and sink in any dwelling unit in a
multiple dwelling......................shall be supplied
at all times (between the hours of six a.m. and midnight)
with hot water at a constant minimum temperature of 120@
Fahrenheit from a central source constructed in
accordance with provisions of the building code and the
regulations of the department.
The inspection report finding inadequate hot water services
confirms the tenant's complaint that the owner failed to meet the
standard set forth in Section 27-2031 of the Housing Maintenance
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 inspector's report, contrary to the owner's claim on appeal,
clearly specified that the kitchen water temperature was 105@F,
which fails to meet the requirement of the Housing Maintenance
The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based his
determination on the entire record, including the results of the
on-site physical inspection conducted on June 21, 1988, and that
pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, 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
The Commissioner notes that the tenant's statement of May 26, 1989,
that hot-water in the kitchen was adequate, post-dated the appealed
order and was, therefore, not dispositive.
The Division's records reveal that the owner filed a rent
restoration application under Docket No. CH510154OR, which was
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 provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA