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

          APPEAL OF                             DOCKET NO.: DA120211RO 
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                DOCKET NO.: BL120733S        
               Richard Albert,          

               On January 23, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an  order  issued  on
          January 6, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 94-05 222 Street, Apt. 5H, Queens Village, 
          New York wherein the Administrator reduced the rent upon a finding 
          of a decrease in services.

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

               This proceeding was commenced by the filing of twelve separate 
          complaints between May 21, 1987 and April 29, 1988, alleging roach 
          and mice infestation, water seepage damage in kitchen, a burned out 
          electrical outlet in kitchen, non-functioning intercom, a  broken
          marble sill plate, torn kitchen linoleum, and windows in need  of

               The owner was served with a copy of the tenant's  complaints
          and submitted an answer on June 13, 1988.

               On September 12, 1988 the tenant responded  to  the  owner's
          answer stating  that  certain  repairs  had  been  made  but  the
          infestation and the defective intercom had yet to be corrected.



               Inspections were conducted by agency employees on November 14, 
          1988, November 28, 1988, and December 8, 1988.   The  inspections
          confirmed roach infestation, a non-functioning intercom and broken 
          and cracked kitchen linoleum with pieces missing.  The inspections 
          confirmed that water damage in the kitchen had been  repaired  as
          well as the kitchen outlet and the marble sill plate, and that the 
          apartment windows had been caulked and painted.

               The Administrator reduced the rent by $12.00 per month, $4.00 
          for each condition confirmed by inspection.

               In the PAR, the owner alleges that the DHCR in a prior order 
          has ruled that the owner is providing exterminator services and in 
          addition submits the work tickets of the professional exterminator 
          stating that extermination was done in the apartment and there was 
          no evidence of live infestation, that the issue  of  whether  the
          buildings's intercom is a required service is yet to be determined 
          by this agency, and that  the  linoleum  was  repaired  when  the
          complaint was received.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be 
          granted in part.

               The issue of the intercom has been determined in Docket  No.
          FH120007RK which found that the intercom is not a required service 
          in any building in the complex.  Accordingly  the  finding  of  a
          defective intercom in this tenant's apartment is revoked.

               Although the owner contends that upon receipt of the complaint 
          he ordered that the linoleum  be  repaired,  inspection  findings
          confirm the condition of the linoleum as  being  in  a  state  of
          disrepair.  Accordingly, the finding  of  defective  linoleum  is

               While the owner contends  that  extermination  is  regularly
          provided, on two occasions the Division inspector's found visible 
          evidence  and  signs  of  roaches   in   this   apartment.    The
          extermination, while provided, has apparently  been  ineffective.
          The owner has an ongoing obligation to provide regular exterminator 
          services and the determination in a prior  proceeding  that  such
          services are being provided does not relieve  the  owner  of  the
          consequences  of  a  later  determination  finding  evidence   of
          infestation.  Accordingly that portion of the Administrator's order 
          which found roach infestation is affirmed.



               The Commissioner notes that an order was issued on June  20,
          1989 partially restoring the rent based on  a  finding  that  new
          linoleum had been installed and there was no  evidence  of  roach
          infestation (DB120067OR). 
               THEREFORE, in accordance with the City Rent Law and the Rent 
          and Eviction Regulations, it is,

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


                                                  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