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

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.:              
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET NO.:
                NORMAN BRESSER                                 


                              PETITIONER      : 

               On December 26, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed 
          a petition for administrative review of an order issued on December 
          8, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 88 West 197th Street, Bronx, N. Y., various 
          apartments, wherein the Administrator determined that the rents of 
          rent controlled apartments in the subject building should be 
          reduced by $15.00 per month effective on the first rent payment day 
          following the issue date of the Rent Administrator's order and the 
          rents of rent stabilized tenants should be reduced by a guideline 
          effective May 1, 1989.  The order was based upon an inspection held 
          on November 10, 1989, which showed that although the owner was 
          maintaining a number of services, other services were not being 
          maintained.  Specifically, the inspection showed evidence of water 
          leaks on the sixth floor and lobby ceiling; defective windows in 
          sundry locations in the building and trash and debris in the back 

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

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DL630315RO

               The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly 
          reduced the rent of various rent-controlled and rent stabilized 
          tenants in the subject building based upon a building-wide decrease 
          in services.

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, among other things, 
          that the Rent Administrator erred by reducing the rents because 
          there has not been a decrease in services and that what repairs 
          were needed are in progress; that a complaint regarding hallway 
          windows was not received by the owner or DHCR; that certain tenants 
          no longer reside in the building and that one tenant did not sign 
          the complaint form. 

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

               A Statement of Building-wide Complaint was filed on February 
          28, 1989, by twelve tenants alleging that the owner was not 
          maintaining various services in the subject building.

               The owner filed an answer to the tenants' complaint alleging, 
          in essence, that all service problems had been addressed. 

               The Commissioner has considered the owner's claim that the 
          Rent Administrator erred by reducing the rents of the rent- 
          controlled and rent stabilized tenants and rejects this argument.

               On November 10, 1989, an inspection was conducted of the 
          subject premises.  The inspection report confirmed the existence of 
          a number of service deficiencies noted in the tenants' complaint.

               Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, 
          a tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
          (DHCR) for a reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level in 
          effect prior to the most recent guidelines adjustment, and the DHCR 
          shall so reduce the rent for the period for which it is found that 
          the owner has failed to maintain required services.

               Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations provides, 
          in pertinent part, that the Administrator may order a decrease of 
          the maximum rent otherwise allowable, where there has been a 
          decrease in the dwelling space, essential services, furniture, 
          furnishings or equipment. 

               Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the Rent 
          Administrator had erred on the basis that certain tenants were no 

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DL630315RO

          longer in occupancy or that one tenant had failed to sign the 
          complaint form.

               The Commissioner finds that a Rent Administrator's rent 
          reduction order applies to the apartment and remains in effect even 
          if the tenant moves from the apartment, until such time as an 
          owner's application for rent restoration is granted.

               The Commissioner has also considered the owner's contention 
          that one rent controlled tenant did not sign the complaint but was 
          erroneously granted a rent reduction and rejects the argument.

               It is fundamental that all rent controlled tenants are 
          entitled to a rent reduction where service deficiencies are shown; 
          regardless of whether they sign the complaint form.

               The record also belies the owner's claim that the tenants did 
          not complain about the windows.  A review of the tenants' complaint 
          indicates that the windows were mentioned and were an object of the 
          tenants' concern.

               The owner had eight months from the date of service of the 
          tenants' complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order 
          to investigate the tenants' complaint and to make the necessary 
          repairs, but failed to do so.  

               The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based 
          his determination on the entire record including the results of the 
          on-site physical inspection conducted on November 10, 1989; and 
          that pursuant to Section 2223.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code 
          and Section 2202.16(a) of the Rent and Eviction Regulations the 
          Administrator acted properly in reducing the rent upon determining 
          that the owner had failed to maintain services. 

               The Commissioner notes that as late as April 16, 1990, sundry 
          tenants in the building had filed affirmations of owner non- 
          compliance or had otherwise complained that the owner had not 
          corrected all of the service deficiencies noted in the complaint.

               This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the 
          owner's right to file the appropriate application with the Division
          for a restoration of rents based upon a restoration of services, if 
          the facts so warrant.  

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and 
          Code and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is

               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          denied, and the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DL630315RO


                                          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