CL210078RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433





          ------------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: CL210078RO

                    165 S 9 Realty Corp.,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: CA210218S
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------x

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above-named petitioner-owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 878 Driggs Avenue, Apt. 7C, Brooklyn, N.Y.

          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 petition.

          The tenant commenced the proceeding below by filing a complaint on 
          January 19, 1988, asserting that the owner had failed to maintain 
          certain services in the subject apartment such as the leaking roof, 
          poor plumbing, leaking pipes in the kitchen, toilet clogs and 
          overflows, discolored walls, windows falling out, and holes in the 
          wooden floor.

          In an answer dated March 18, 1988, the owner denied the allegations 
          set forth in the complaint or otherwise asserted that all required 
          repairs had been or will be completed and that this was the first 
          time they had heard of these defective conditions.

          Thereafter an inspection of the subject apartment was conducted by 
          a DHCR inspector on September 28, 1988, who confirmed the existence 
          of the following defective conditions:

          1.   Hallway ceiling is slightly discolored due to water seepage 
               from above.

          2.   There is water leakage under kitchen sink.

          3.   A. Living room:  three windows - top sashes of the three 
               windows do not open.  Part of left window is cracked.  Center 












          CL210078RO

          and right windows are missing a lock.  Bottom sash of center 
               window is loose - hazardous.  Bottom sash of right window does 
               not open.
               B. Second bedroom: one window lock is inoperative - bottom 
               sash is loose.  Top sash does not move.  Hallway window and 
               bathroom windows are defective.
               C. Master bedroom: two windows - right window top sash does 
               not open.  Bottom sash does not stay open.  Lock is missing.  
               Left window is missing lock.
               D. Diningroom: two windows - left window is missing lock.  Top 
               sash does not open.  Bottom sash does not stay down.  Right 
               window is missing lock.  Top pane is cracked.  Bottom sash 
               does not stay down.
               E. Kitchen: one window chain is broken.  Top sash does not 
               open.  Lock is missing.  All exterior window frames are 
               rotted.

          The following conditions were found by the inspector to have been  
          resolved:

               1.   No evidence of defective or decaying walls.
               2.   No evidence of holes in wooden floor.
               3.   No evidence of clogged toilet.

          Based on the inspector's report, the Rent Administrator directed 
          restoration of services and further ordered, a reduction of the 
          stabilization rent.

          In its petition for administrative review, the owner states, in 
          substance, that they assumed management of the building in June 
          1987 and received no copy of the original complaint nor are they 
          familiar with any answer being given.

          The DHCR served a copy of the petition on the tenant on March 10, 
          1989.  The tenant answered that new windows were installed 
          throughout the apartment but they do not open, the refrigerator was 
          not supplied by the owner, the living room has a water leak in the 
          ceiling, and the stove does not have an operating oven.  
            
          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petition should be denied.

          The Commissioner has considered the owner's claim that it did not 
          receive the tenant's complaint and rejects this argument.




          The same entity who filed the petition responded to the tenant's 
          complaint on March 18, 1988 and an inspection of the apartment six 
          (6) months later on September 28, 1988 still revealed the defective 
          conditions.  






          CL210078RO


          The Administrator's order was properly based on the on-site 
          inspection which confirmed the existence of defective conditions in 
          the subject apartment.  Accordingly, the determination was in all 
          respects proper and is hereby sustained.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is 
          required to order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant, 
          where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required 
          services.  The owner's petition does not establish any basis for 
          modifying or revoking the Administrator's order which determined 
          that the owner was not maintaining  required services based on a 
          physical inspection on September 28, 1988 confirming the existence 
          of defective conditions in the subject apartment for which a rent 
          reduction is warranted.

          The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so 
          warrant.  The rent will not be restored until a rent restoration 
          application is filed and granted.

          The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted 
          by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this 
          order and opinion.
           
          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, denied, and 
          that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
          affirmed. 


          ISSUED:




                                                                     
                                             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