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

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: CJ420067RT

                    Jean Ishikawa,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: BH402401S


          On October 20, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          September 16, 1988, by the rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 980 Second Avenue, New York, N.Y., 
          Apt. 2-B, wherein the Administrator determined that a reduction in 
          rent was warranted based upon a reduction in 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 August 8, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that the 
          owner failed to maintain services.

          The owner filed an answer to the complaint alleging that many of 
          the service deficiencies specified in the complaint have already 
          been corrected and those that have not will be corrected in the 
          near future.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on June 16, 1988, revealed broken 
          plaster in the wall by the two front windows and plaster broken on 
          the bathtub wall by the faucet.  The inspector found that all other 
          repairs specified in the complaint had been corrected.

          On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          all repairs were not corrected and that those that were corrected 


          were done in an unworkmanlike manner.  The petitioner also 
          requested a copy of the DHCR inspection report.

          The petition was served on the owner on November 30, 1988 and on 
          December 13, 1988, the owner filed an answer to the petition 
          stating that the work has been done.

          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, to reflect the decreased rental value because 
          of the decrease in services.

          Concerning the petitioner-tenant's argument that the Administrator 
          failed to give her the inspection results, the Commissioner finds 
          that due process does not require that the tenant be sent copies of 
          the report.

          The Commissioner has also considered and rejects the petitioner's 
          claim on appeal that the owner failed to correct additional service 
          deficiencies not specified in the Rent Administrator's rent 
          reduction order of September 16, 1988.

          The file is devoid of any evidence showing that the owner failed to 
          restore more services than are delineated in the appealed order.

          The appealed order clearly states that the owner failed to correct 
          broken plaster on the wall near two front windows; that there was 
          broken plaster on the bathroom wall located near the bathtub 
          faucets and that the shower head was not properly secured.

          The inspection held on June 16, 1988, corroborated the owner's 
          consistent assertion that several repairs were made in a 
          workmanlike manner and that there were no additional service 
          deficiencies other than those specified in the Rent Administrator's 

          Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the tenant has offered 
          insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's 

          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 16, 1988, pursuant to 
          Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations, and that the 


          Rent Administrator properly determined that a rent reduction of 
          $7.00 per month reflecting the reduced rental value of the 
          accommodation because of the decreased services was warranted.

          Division records reveal that a partial grant of the owner's 
          application for rent restoration was granted in the amount of $5.00 
          per month, under Docket No. EB420029OR, and that upon a full 
          restoration of services, the owner may reapply for the remaining 
          $2.00 per month rent.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, 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