STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: DF120093RT
DOCKET NO.: DC120065RP
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 31, 1989, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a petition
for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on May 26, 1989,
by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodation
known as 43-19 41st Street, Apt. 1-B, Sunnyside, New York, wherein
the Administrator determined that the order previously entered on
April 21, 1988, which reduced the rent of the subject apartment,
should be modified.
The appealed order stated that:
The evidence or record indicates that a rent reduction
for painting was not warranted due to tenant's
postponement of painting until May, 1988.
Therefore, it is ordered that the above-mentioned order
previously entered herein be, and it hereby is, modified
by deleting the painting issue. Consequently, the 10%
MLR rent reduction is without merit.
Additionally, based on the evidence that repairs to the
flushometer were completed in November 1988 and new
windows were installed throughout the apartment, it is
ordered that the above-mentioned order be further
modified by restoring rent in the amount of eleven
dollars ($11.00) per month effective December 1, 1988,
the 1st of the month following the date repairs were
This proceeding is hereby terminated without prejudice to
the tenant's right to file a new complaint based on the
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
scope of the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly
modified the order of April 21, 1988.
The owner filed a request to reconsider the Rent Administrator's
rent reduction order based upon fraud, illegality, or irregularity
in a vital matter.
The tenant filed an answer to the request for reconsideration
alleging that although she requested that the paint-job be
postponed several times due to family illness, none of the painters
ever returned to do the painting.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that
the Rent Administrator erred by modifying the rent reduction order
of April 21, 1988, issued under Docket No. BH120366S, because the
owner failed to complete the paint-job and what was done was
completed in an unworkmanlike manner.
The petition was served on the owner on July 18, 1989, and on July
28, 1989, the owner filed an answer to the petition stating that
the tenant disingenuously denied the owner's workers access to
complete the painting.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
A review of the file shows that the rent for the subject apartment
was reduced pursuant to an inspection held on January 29, 1988,
which disclosed that, among other things; the owner had failed to
provide painting services.
However, evidence in the file indicates that despite several
attempts to paint the apartment, the tenant postponed the painting
until May, 1988.
The Commissioner notes that the tenant's answer filed on March 29,
1989, concedes this point.
Accordingly, upon the facts found herein, the Commissioner finds
that the Rent Administrator properly modified the rent reduction
order of April 21, 1988, to the extent of deleting the painting
issue and restoring the rent in the amount of 10% of the Maximum
Legal Rent and by restoring the rent in the amount of eleven
dollars per month, effective December 1, 1988.
The Commissioner notes that if the tenant wants to have the subject
apartment painted, it will be necessary to file a new complaint
with the DHCR.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA