STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: CK420078RO
Normandy Associates c/o
Orsid Realty Corp.,
DOCKET NO.: BK420737S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On November 29, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
October 25, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 140 Riverside Drive, Apt. 1-K, New York,
N.Y., 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 of 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 November 23, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that
the owner failed to maintain certain services in the subject
The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on January 19, 1988,
alleging that it has been in court with the tenant on a continuing
basis and that a decision issued in Civil Court on January 11, 1988
established that the tenant failed to provide apartment access to
its workers to make necessary repairs.
A DHCR inspection conducted on August 16, 1988, revealed that:
1. Living room ceiling and walls are peeling paint, blistered and
water stained. Kitchen wall is peeling paint and plaster in
some areas. Bedroom walls and ceiling are blistered and
peeling paint and plaster.
2. There are mice droppings in the kitchen as well as roaches.
3. Refrigerator bulb is out. The freezer box is stuffed with
newspaper around the outer surface. Freezer door is broken.
4. Flushometer pressure is too powerful and as a result water
comes out of the toilet bowl as it flushes.
5. Kitchen sink faucet aerator sprays water through the sides.
6. Bathroom located in the hallway has a consistent leak in
bathroom tub faucet (heavy leak).
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
the tenant denied its workers access to the apartment to do
necessary repair work and that a Civil Court decision issued under
Index No. L & T 60584/87, supported this conclusion.
The petition was served on the tenant on December 29, 1988.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The Housing and Maintenance Code provides:
S D26-10.07 Owner's right of access---No tenant shall refuse to
permit the owner or his agent or employee, to enter his dwelling
unit or other space under his control to make repairs or
improvements required by this code or other law or to inspect such
apartment or other space to determine compliance with this code or
any other provision of law, if the right of entry is exercised at
a reasonable time and in reasonable manner. The department may by
regulation restrict the time and manner of such inspections.
In the instant proceeding, the owner alleged that the tenant denied
its workers access to the subject apartment and that it, therefore,
could not make necessary repairs.
However, a review of the file shows that the owner failed to
establish a denial of access with sufficient evidence.
Accordingly, the Administrator properly relied on the entire
evidence in the record, including the results of the August 16,
1988 inspection which confirmed the existence of defective
conditions warranting a rent reduction.
The Commissioner has considered but rejects the petitioner's
argument that the access issue was conclusively decided by the
decision rendered in the Civil Court under Index No. L & T
60584/87. The decision in that action merely noted that the
petitioner's unrebutted testimony indicated that the respondent
(tenant) did not cooperate in giving access to the owner.
This, in and of itself, did not conclusively decide the access
The Commissioner notes that the owner's rent restoration
applications were respectively granted on December 8, 1989, under
Docket No. DE420162OR and August 2, 1990, under Docket No.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
the Administrator's be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA