CI410138RT, et al.
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.: CI410138RT;
MARY STEELE SAMUEL TINSLEY CI410142RT; CI410143RT;
SUZANNE DARY VIRGINIA JENKINS CI410144RT; CI210301RT
LILLIAN FORTE JACQUELINE CARTER
and FROHSINE M. HUDSON,
PETITIONERS DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW,
AND MODIFYING RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
On various dates, the above-named petitioner-tenants filed and
refiled timely petitions for administrative review (PARs) of an
order issued on September 6, 1988, by the Rent Administrator,
concerning the housing accommodations known as various apartments,
at 347 and 365 Lincoln Place, Brooklyn, New York, wherein the
Administrator determined that the owner was not maintaining certain
services, directed restoration of such services, and ordered a rent
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.
A review of the record reveals that 15 tenants of the 54 apartments
in the subject building joined in filing a complaint alleging a
decrease in various building-wide services.
In answer to the complaint, the owner stated that the defective
conditions alleged in the complaint did not exist or had been
CI410138RT, et al.
A physical inspection by the Division of Housing and Community
Renewal (DHCR) on June 28, 1988 revealed that there was no
superintendent and the halls and floors needed sweeping and mopping
and that the basement entrance door was defective.
Based on the inspector's report, the Rent Administrator issued the
order appealed herein reducing the rent to the level in effect
prior to the most recent guidelines adjustment for the rent
stabilized tenants who signed the complaint and by $8.00 per month
for one rent controlled tenant.
The tenants who filed petitions for administrative review all
assert that they are rent controlled tenants but they received an
order applicable to rent stabilized tenants.
In answer to the petitions, the owner states that the Rent
Administrator's order should be reversed because the premises are
kept clean by the superintendent, the locks on the basement door
are continuously replaced but are vandalized by outsiders who are
allowed to come into the building by tenants, and that the peti-
tions should be dismissed because the rent controlled tenants
already have a rent reduction.
After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the Commis-
sioner is of the opinion that the petitions should be granted.
The Division's records support the tenants' assertions that they
are rent controlled, rather than rent stabilized, tenants, and this
is not denied by the owner. Accordingly, the maximum legal rent
for the petitioners is reduced by $8.00 per month, effective the
first rent payment day following September 6, 1988, the issue date
of the Rent Administrator's order.
The matters raised by the owner in answer to the petitions are not
appropriate issues for consideration in resolving these petitions
filed by tenants. Since the owner did not file its own petition,
there is no basis for modifying or reversing the Administrator's
orders except to grant a $8.00 per month rent reduction for the
petitioning tenants. The owner is advised to file a rent
restoration application when the necessary repairs are completed
and until such an application is filed and granted, the rent
reduction ordered in Docket No. CC230010B as modified remains in
CI410138RT, et al.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
New York City, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, granted,
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
modified in accordance with this Order and Opinion.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA