Adm. Rev. Docket No: CL 430012-RO
                                 STATE OF NEW YORK
                     DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                           OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

        ------------------------------------X 
        IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
        APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: CL 430012-RO 
                                            :  
             TIME EQUITIES,                    DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                               DOCKET NO.: CE 430104-B  
                              PETITIONER    : 
        ------------------------------------X                           
          
           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On December  8,  1988,  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
        Petition for  Administrative  Review  against  an  order  issued  on
        November 10,  1988,  by  the  Rent  Administrator  at  Gertz  Plaza,
        Jamaica, New York concerning the housing accommodation known as  221
        West 82 Street,  New  York,  New  York,  wherein  the  Administrator
        granted the tenant's request for a rent reduction based on a finding 
        of a reduction of building-wide services.

        The applicable law  is  Section  2202.16  of  the  Rent  &  Eviction
        Regulations.

        One tenant initiated the proceedings on May 31,  1988  by  filing  a
        complaint alleging that the owner had failed to address a  condition
        reported to the owner that the elevator stopped 21/2"  to  3"  above
        the floor level.

        One June 27, 1988, the  owner  responded  that  separate  inspection
        conducted by the elevator maintenance contractor on  June  21,  1988
        and by the City Department of Housing Preservation  and  Development
        dated June 17, and 20, 1988 found the  elevator  to  be  in  working
        order.  However, the Department  of  Buildings  Elevator  Inspection
        Report submitted by the owner indicated the results  of  an  January
        21, 1988 inspection to be unsatisfactory.

        An inspection was conducted by a member of the  Division  inspection
        staff.  The inspector reported that the elevator stopped  "a  couple
        of inches below the floor" on the way up, but stopped level  on  the
        way down.

        Based on the inspection, the Administrator reduced the rent by $4.00 
        for all rent controlled tenants.

        The petitioner requests that the Administrator's order be  reversed,
        arguing as below, that the condition had been rectified prior to the 
        complaint,  as  attested  to  below  and  at  PAR  by  the  elevator
        maintenance contractor and the city inspection agency.

        An inspection below confirmed the existence of  a  serious  tripping
        hazard for the subject premises, notwithstanding the  owner's  claim
        of periodic maintenance.  Moreover, there was no evidence in file of 
        the      City agency authorized inspection showing the  elevator  to
        be operating properly.  In fact, the only report from the  Buildings







        Adm. Rev. Docket No: CL 430012-RO
        Department submitted by the owner  revealed  the  results  of  their
        inspection to be unsatisfactory.

        The  Commissioner  rejects  the  petitioner's  argument   that   the
        Administrator erroneously determined a rent decrease  for  all  rent
        controlled tenants, including tenants residing on the easterly  side
        of the building, not affected by the westerly elevator  as  well  as
        those tenants on the westerly side who do not live on  the  tenant's
        floor.  The Commissioner notes the fact that  a  defective  elevator
        services certain       of  apartment  does  not  mitigate  that  the
        condition constitutes a building-wide reduction of service.   It  is
        further noted that rent control provisions entitle all rent  control
        tenants to rent  reductions  resulting  from  building-wide  service
        diminutions, regardless of whether they signed the complaint.

        THEREFORE, in accordance with the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 
        1984, and Chapter 403 of the Laws of 1983, as amended by Chapter 102 
        of the Laws of 1984, 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, affirmed.

        ISSUED:




                                                                      
                                        ELLIOT SANDER
                                        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