STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.:
                    Norma Trager,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.:


          On August 11, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on July 
          12, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 3555 Netherland Avenue, Bronx, New York, 
          Apt. 4-E, wherein the Administrator determined that a reduction in 
          rent was not warranted based upon a reduction in 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 denied 
          the tenant's application for a decrease in rent.

          On November 4, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner failed to maintain services.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint on January 18, 1988, 
          alleging that the elevator is presently in safe and working order 
          and that there has been no decrease in services.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on May 16, 1988, revealed that there 
          was extensive renovation throughout the apartment and that all 
          services were being maintained.

          On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the apartment was in need of a paint job; the floors were unscraped 
          and that the elevator was temporarily shut down.
          The petition was served on the owner on September 30, 1988 and on 
          October 18, 1988, the owner filed an answer to the petition stating 


          that there has been no diminution of services and that it has been 
          ready, willing and able to paint the subject apartment but that the 
          tenant advised the owner that she will paint the apartment herself.

          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 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 clearly shows that the Rent Administrator in denying the 
          tenant's application for a rent reduction, based his findings on 
          the results of an inspection, held by the DHCR on May 16, 1988, 
          which revealed that the owner was providing all required services 
          specified in the tenant's complaint.

          The Commissioner deems it appropriate to rely on the results of the 
          Division's inspection and finds that the petitioner failed to 
          adduce convincing evidence that the inspector's findings were 
          erroneous in any way.

          The Commissioner notes that the tenant substantially renovated the 
          subject apartment with the owner's consent.  The Commissioner 
          further finds that the tenant's voluntary renovation of the 
          apartment does not constitute a basis for a claim for compensation 
          from the owner for the completed work.  Clearly, this does not 
          constitute a decrease in services.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and 
          that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 


                                             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