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.: DF420231RT
DOCKET NO.: CJ420042OR
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND
REVOKING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER DOCKET NO. CJ420042OR
On June 2, 1989, the above-named petitioner-tenant timely refiled
a petition for administrative review of an order issued on March
29, 1989 by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 137 East 28 Street, Apt. 6A, New York, N.Y.,
wherein the Administrator restored the rent in the amount of $3.00
per month for alleged repairs to the bathroom floor tile.
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 the owner of an
application to restore rent dated October 10, 1988, alleging that
the owner had restored those services for which a rent reduction
order was issued on November 9, 1987, under Docket No. BD420618S.
The November 9, 1987 order reduced the rent for the following
conditions: bathroom tiles loose and in need of caulking - $3.00,
broken kitchen tiles - $3.00, apartment in need of plastering and
painting throughout - 10% M.L.R.
Division records show that on December 30, 1987, the owner filed an
application to restore rent which was assigned Docket No.
CA420084OR. In connection with that application, an inspection
conducted by a DHCR staff inspector determined that the kitchen
tiles had been repaired and the apartment had been painted in a
workmanlike manner. However, the inspection disclosed that the
bathroom tiles on the shower wall and around the paper holder were
uneven, each area being approximately one square foot.
This resulted in the issuance of the Administrator's order dated
July 20, 1988, restoring the rent for the two corrected conditions
and directing the owner to refile for the remaining $3.00 after
repairs are made to the bathroom tiles. The order, however,
incorrectly refers to the bathroom tiles as floor tiles whereas the
underlying complaint and rent reduction order related to the wall
tiles (emphasis added).
In this case, hereunder review, an inspection conducted by a DHCR
staff inspector on February 7, 1989, disclosed there is no problem
with the floor tiles, however, the wall tiles were found to be
uneven throughout the bathroom. Nevertheless, by order dated March
29, 1989 under Docket No. CJ420042OR, the Administrator restored
the remaining $3.00 on the basis that the bathroom floor tiles had
In the PAR, the tenant states, in relevant part, that the floor
tiles were not the subject of a complaint and that no repairs to
the bathroom wall tiles have been made. A copy of the tenant's PAR
was served on the owner who responded on September 13, 1989. The
owner requested that, in light of the results of the DHCR
inspection of February 7, 1988, the order restoring the rent remain
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be granted.
A transcription error in the processing of the prior rent
restoration application resulted in the directive in that order
regarding the bathroom floor tiles. It was error for the
Administrator to restore the rent for this condition when it was
not a basis for the original rent reduction. The report of
inspection of February 7, 1989 clearly states that the wall tile
condition still existed at that date.
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,
and that the Rent Administrator's order (Docket No. CJ420042OR) be,
and the same hereby is, revoked. The $3.00 per month rent
reduction for this condition is reinstated, effective the first
rent payment following November 9, 1987. A subsequent proceeding
resulted in a finding that a rent reduction for defective bathroom
wall tiles should be restored effective July 7, 1993 (Docket No.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA