CI510037RO
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.: CI510037RO
B.B. Management Corp. RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: BI410273S
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 15, 1988 the named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review of an order issued on August 17, 1988, by
the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodations known
as Apt. 4L, 276-278 Sherman Avenue, New York, NY wherein the Rent
Administrator found that the owner was not maintaining required
services, directed restoration of such services, and ordered a rent
reduction.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully considered
that portion relevant to the issues raised by this appeal.
A review of the record reveals that on September 17, 1987
the tenant filed a statement of complaint of decrease in services
in which she alleged that there were numerous conditions throughout
her apartment that required repairs.
In answer to the complaint, the owner stated that work crews had
gone to the tenant's apartment and completed some repairs but were
ordered by the tenant to stop work and have not been allowed access
since.
The tenant replied that workers did come to her apartment and did
do some repairs but declared that they were finished and haven't
been heard from since. The tenant denied ever refusing access.
A physical inspection was scheduled for March 25, 1988 at which the
owner, the tenant and the owner's repair person(s) were directed to
appear. The inspector reported that a plumber, plaster and tile
man, building agent, and carpenter were in the process of doing
repairs. A second inspection on notice to both the owner and the
tenant was scheduled for 1 p.m. June 30, 1988. The inspector's
report indicates the date of inspection as June 30, 1988 with a
"Final Visit" on July 19, 1988. The inspector stated that the
CI510037RO
refrigerator had several defects, the kitchen ceiling had broken
and cracked plaster, the two bedroom had loose floor boards, the
toilet would not flush because of inadequate water pressure, the
bathroom tiles needed replacing and repair, the bathroom wall tiles
needed replastering, the walls and ceilings throughout the
apartment had peeling paint and plaster, and the bedroom door was
missing.
Based on this report, the Rent Administrator issued the order
appealed herein.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts again
that the owner had attempted to complete repairs but the tenant
ordered the workers to leave the apartment, that the owner had work
crews at the apartment on June 30, 1988 from 1 p.m. until 2:30 but
the inspector did not appear, and that the rent reduction order is
based on an inspection of which the owner had no notice. The owner
also claims that the order cites conditions that were not in the
original complaint.
In answer to the petition, the tenant states that did the owner and
his workers did appear for the first inspection on March 25, 1988
but left at 10:15 a.m. when the inspector left. The tenant claims
that the landlord failed to appear at the second inspection on June
30, 1988 and the inspector left at 4:30 p.m. The tenant included
with her answer a statement by a representative from the Northern
Manhattan Corporation who has been helping her to get the repairs
done and who was present at the inspection. The representative
states that the landlord failed to appear at the June 30, 1988
inspection, that the landlord has repeatedly been informed of the
repairs that are needed, and that the Administrator's order should
not be reversed or cancelled just because the owner wasn't notified
of an inspection.
After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code requires DHCR to
order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant, where 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 owner's petition does not establish
any basis for modifying or revoking the Administrator's order which
found, based on the inspector's report, that required repairs had
not be done.
The owner did not submit any evidence to the Administrator to
substantiate the allegation that the tenant failed to provide
access at any time. The tenant denies the assertion, pointing out
that it is in her interest to admit the owner's work crews to
repair the items cited in her complaint. The record is devoid of
appointment letters sent to the tenant by regular and certified
mail setting up specific dates for work to be done. In the absence
of such evidence, the owner is not entitled to advance notice of
when the Division's inspection is to take place. Service of the
complaint on the owner afforded adequate notice of the conditions
requiring repair and the length of time the proceeding was pending
allowed sufficient opportunity to complete the repairs or establish
that access was not being provided.
Although it is unclear from the inspector's report regarding the
June 30, 1988 visit whether the inspector appeared at the scheduled
time and whether the owner was present or why another "final visit"
took place, the Commissioner is of the opinion that this ambiguity
is immaterial because notice to the owner of the inspection was not
warranted.
Moreover, a review of the complaint reveals that every item cited
in the Administrator's order was listed in the tenant's complaint.
Therefore, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
it is
ORDERED that this petition be and the same hereby is denied and the
Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|