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

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: CK110101RO

                    Richard Albert,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: BL110749S



          On November 21, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on November 
          9, 1988 by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 93-49 222 Street, Apt. 1U, Queens Village, 
          New York, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner had 
          failed to maintain certain services, reduced the rent, and directed 
          the owner to restore the services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issue raised by the administrative appeal.

          This proceeding was commenced by the filing by the tenant of 
          various complaints of a decrease in services alleging damaged floor 
          near bedroom radiator and failure to paint exterior of window 
          frames in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code.

          An inspection conducted by a DHCR staff inspector on September 29, 
          1988 confirmed that the hardwood floor by the bedroom radiator was 
          waterstained.  The inspection also disclosed that the top sashes of 
          the windows throughout the apartment are painted shut.

          Based on this inspection the Administrator issued the order of 
          November 9, 1988 here under review.

          In the PAR, the owner states that the floor condition has already 
          been the subject of a rent reduction order, that the condition was 


          corrected and an order restoring the rent was issued on October 5, 

          In addition, the owner contends that the conditions are too minor 
          to warrant a rent reduction, that the Agency did not follow 
          established Federal procedures regarding a hearing and due process, 
          that this case was brought by a tenant representative in violation 
          of a court stipulation, and that the tenants have harassed the 
          owner in every aspect of building management and have filed 
          duplicate complaints for rent reductions.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petition should be granted and the Administrator's order 

          A review of the Division's files indicates that on June 23, 1986 
          the Administrator reduced the rent for the condition described in 
          the order as "Leaking bedroom radiator caused the floor board to be 
          rotted."  Thereafter, an inspection conducted on March 23, 1987 by 
          the Division determined that the leaking bedroom radiator had been 
          repaired and an order restoring the rent was issued on October 5, 
          1987, with the effective date of December 1, 1986.  The order 
          contained the direction that the owner repair the water stained 
          floor, which condition it appears was insufficient to justify 
          continuing the rent reduction.

          The portion of the tenant's complaint regarding the damaged floor 
          was dated April 23, 1987 which was one month after the inspection 
          and approximately six months prior to the order which restored the 
          rent.  In the complaint the tenant makes no mention that the leak 
          had recurred, and the record indicates that the condition described 
          in the complaint is the same one previously dealt with by this 

          The Commissioner therefore finds that it was error for the 
          Administrator to reduce the rent for the very same condition that 
          was previously deemed insufficient to justify continuing a rent 
          reduction and on this basis the portion of the order relating to 
          this condition is revoked.

          The Commissioner notes that the finding in the Administrator's 
          order that upper window sashes are painted shut was not mentioned 
          in the tenant's complaint which alleged that the exterior of her 
          windows had not been painted in over five years and that such 
          violation of the Housing Maintenance Code justifies a rent 
          reduction.  The Commissioner finds that the condition found is not 
          one which the tenant complained of and that the owner was not 

          served with or otherwise on notice of this condition.  Therefore, 
          the portion of the order relating to this condition is revoked.

          The petitioner's other contentions have been examined and found to 


          be without merit.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code 
          and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted, 
          and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
          revoked in accordance with this order and opinion.

          The tenant may pay any arrears in rent arising as a result of this 
          order and opinion in equal monthly installments over a 24 month 


                                             LULA M. ANDERSON
                                             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