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

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: CK530039RT

                    Rosie McSpadden-Eugene,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: CB510172OR


          On November 7, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          October 27, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 610 West 141st Street, New York, N.Y., Apt. 
          5-A, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner should be 
          granted partial restoration of the rent based upon a finding that 
          certain services had been restored.  The order specified that the 
          owner may reapply for full restoration when repairs are completed 
          to the defective stairway windows between the 4th and 3rd floors 
          and the 3rd and 2nd floors.

          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 
          restored the rent of the subject apartment.

          On February 3, 1988, the owner filed an application for rent 
          restoration alleging that services for which a rent reduction order 
          had been issued by the Rent Administrator on November 5, 1984, 
          under Docket No. 2T-9900090-143 has been restored.

          The tenant filed an answer to the application alleging that the 
          owner failed to correct all service deficiencies.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on September 19, 1988, revealed that:


          1.   There is no evidence of defective lobby and building entrance 
               door checks.  Door checks are working properly.
          2.   Lobby door is properly locked.
          3.   Public areas are clean.

          The inspector did find cracked and broken windows in the stairways 
          at two locations.  

          On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the lobby ceiling is falling down and the public areas are dirty.

          The petition was served on the owner on December 14, 1988 and on 
          December 19, 1988, the owner filed an answer to the petition 
          stating that the subject building is maintained clean at all times 
          and that the inspection results corroborate this statement.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

          The owner, on proof of restoration of those services which were the 
          subject of the Rent Administrator's reduction order is, by law, 
          entitled to an order of rent restoration.

          The record clearly shows that the Rent Administrator in partially 
          granting the owner's restoration application, based his findings on 
          results of an inspection held by the Division of Housing and 
          Community Renewal, on September 19, 1988, which revealed that the 
          owner was maintaining all of the services specified in the 
          Administrator's rent reduction order of November 5, 1984, except 
          for certain public area windows that required repair.

          The Commissioner deems it appropriate to rely on the results of the 
          Division's inspection and finds that the petitioner failed to 
          adduce convincing evidence that the inspector's findings were 
          erroneous in any way.

          This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant's continuing 
          right to file an appropriate application for a rent reduction, if 
          the facts so warrant.

          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 order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.


                                             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