STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.: DI430034RO
MURRAY MANSIONS/ DI430064RT
241 W. 13TH STREET OWNER'S CORP.
VARIOUS TENANTS OF ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
241 W. 13TH STREET NO.: CK430143OR
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above referenced administrative appeals have been
consolidated as all contain common issues of law and fact.
On September 12, 1989 the above named petitioner-owner filed
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued August 21, 1989. Petitions for administrative
review were also filed by an individual tenant and an authorized
tenant representative. The order here under review concerned
various housing accommodations located at 241 W. 13th Street, New
York, N.Y. The Administrator granted the owner's application for
rent restoration in part for rent controlled tenants and denied the
application with regard to rent stabilized tenants.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
The owner commenced this proceeding on January 4, 1989 by
filing a rent restoration application wherein it alleged that it
had restored services for which a rent reduction order bearing
Docket No. BL430073B had been issued. The Commissioner notes that
the rents were ordered reduced based on findings of vermin
infestation and broken windows in the public area as well as an
inoperative washing machine. The rent reduction order also noted
that the owner failed to display a sign containing the name,
address and phone number of the superintendent or janitor.
The tenants were served with a copy of the application and
afforded an opportunity to respond. Various tenants filed responses
and stated, in sum, that the owner had not restored services and
that the application should be denied.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
building. The inspection was conducted on May 15, 1989 and
revealed that the public area window sashes and frames throughout
the subject building were rotted and allowed air seepage. All
other services were found to have been maintained.
On May 24, 1989 the Administrator sent the owner a notice
regarding the conditions existing with regard to the public area
windows. The owner was afforded an opportunity to make repairs and
present proof thereof to the Administrator. The owner failed to
respond to this notice.
The Administrator issued the order here under review on August
21, 1989. Rent restoration of $9.00 per month was ordered for rent
controlled tenants with the owner given leave to refile for the
remaining $3.00 when the public area windows were repaired. The
application was denied with regard to rent stabilized tenants.
The owner states on appeal that the public area windows cannot
be replaced due to the fact that the New York City Landmarks
Preservation Commissioner must give permission before any window
replacement can be done and such permission has not been given. The
petition was served on the tenants on January 9, 1990
Various tenants filed response wherein they stated, in sum,
that the Landmarks Preservation Commission did not have to give
permission to replace the windows, that the owner's argument was
without merit and that the petition should be denied.
Two petitions were filed by tenants. In Docket No.
DI430064RT, an authorized tenant representative states, in sum,
that the owner has not corrected the conditions regarding the
vermin infestation, washing machine nor posted an appropriate sign.
The tenants submit photographs in support of the petition. The
petition was served on the owner on December 26, 1989.
The owner, as represented by counsel, filed an answer on
January 14, 1990 and stated that the tenants' petition was
defective because the incorrect owner was named and that it had
restored the services for which rent restoration was granted.
In Docket No. DJ410218RT one individual tenant states that
there are broken and cracked windows in the public areas, that the
washing machine damages clothes, that the washing machine room is
dirty and that the sign posted regarding the whereabouts of the
superintendent does not list his address nor the fact that he does
not live within 200 feet of the building. The petition was served
on the owner on January 8, 1990.
The owner again filed a response through counsel and again
stated that the petition was without merit and should be denied.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petitions should be denied.
With regard to the owner's appeal the Commissioner notes that
the owner's defense was not raised at any time prior to the filing
of the petition nor did the owner respond to the May 24, 1989
notice sent by the Administrator. Furthermore, the Administrator's
order did not specifically call for replacement of the windows, but
merely repair of the rotted frames and the prevention of air
seepage. The owner's argument on appeal is without merit. The
petition is denied.
The petitions filed by the tenants are also denied. The
Commissioner deems it appropriate to rely on the report of the DHCR
inspector who is an impartial observer rather than on the
unsupported allegations of a party to the proceeding. The report
contradicts the evidence submitted by the tenant representative and
the petition filed by the individual tenant is completely
unsupported by any evidence. The order here under review is
The Commissioner notes that the owner's reapplication for rent
restoration (Docket No. GF430012OR) has been granted by the
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code and
Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are,
denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA