DC630223RO

                                  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.: DC630223RO
                                                                 
                 N & A MANAGEMENT CO.,               RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                     DOCKET NO.: CF630057B
                                    PETITIONER
          -------------------------------------x


          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On March 15, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on February 
          15, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 2076 Wallace Avenue, Bronx, New York, 
          wherein the Administrator found that there had been a reduction in 
          services, building wide, and ordered a rent decrease.

          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.

          This proceeding was commenced by the filing by various tenants of 
          a complaint of reduction in services.  The owner was served with a 
          copy of the tenants' complaint and filed an answer.  Thereafter, an 
          inspection by a Division employee confirmed the existence of some 
          of the complained of conditions, resulting in the Administrator's 
          order reducing the rent by one guideline for the rent stabilized 
          tenants.

          In the PAR, the owner states that it was not notified of the 
          conditions in the building; that a new intercom system was 
          installed in July 1988; that the building wide complaint was filed 
          by a tenant representative and since owner has not received a 
          statement signed by the various tenants requesting a rent cut, the 
          tenants are not entitled to a rent reduction; that janitorial 
          services are being provided; it is the tenants who are littering 
          the hallways.




          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 












          DC630223RO

          that the petition should be denied.

          The evidence of record indicates that the owner was served with the 
          tenants' complaint on June 29, 1988, that it was signed by the 
          tenant of Apt. 411, that the request for relief was joined in by 11 
          other tenants, that the complaint listed 3 tenant representatives 
          (one of whom also signed the complaint), and that the owner 
          responded to the complaint in a submission dated July 1, 1988.  The 
          Commissioner therefore rejects the owner's contention that the 
          tenants listed in the order did not sign the complaint or that the 
          owner was not notified of the conditions complained of.

          The owner's assertion that a new intercom system was installed in 
          July 1988, which was prior to this Division's inspection in 
          November 1988, does not contradict the inspector's finding.  The 
          owner's assertion lacks credibility in view of the fact that, in 
          the proceeding below, the owner asserted that a new intercom system 
          had been installed in March 1987.  The physical inspection confirms 
          that the intercom system, even if it is new, is not functioning 
          adequately.  The physical inspection conducted by the Division  
          must be given greater weight than the owner's self-serving 
          statements.

          The owner's contention that the building is kept clean is belied by 
          the results of inspection, and its assertion that the conditions 
          are tenant induced is no defense.  An owner may not absolve itself 
          of responsibility for hallway cleanliness by claiming that the lack 
          thereof was caused by the tenants.  An owner is responsible for 
          maintaining the hallways in a clean condition.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the City Rent Law, the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, 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