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
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
WAYNE HOUSE COMPANY, DOCKET NO.:
3119 Bailey Avenue
PETITIONER Apt. 1-A, Bronx, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely Petition for Administrative
Review (PAR) of an order issued on June 2, 1989, concerning the
housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding on April 25, 1988, by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner asserted in substance that there were no
defective conditions that needed to be repaired, and that some of
the problems might have been caused by the tenant.
On May 10, 1989, an inspection of the subject apartment was con-
ducted by a Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) staff
member who confirmed the existence of defective conditions.
By an order dated June 2, 1989, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the
conditions specified in the Administrator's order are minor in
nature and do not warrant a rent reduction; that one of the two
conditions specified in the order was likely caused by the tenant;
and that he was not notified about the inspection as he had
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is
authorized to order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant,
where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required
services. The owner's petition does not establish any basis to
modify or revoke the Administrator's determination based on the May
10, 1989 inspection which confirmed the existence of defective
conditions, warranting a rent reduction.
The Commissioner further notes that the owner's contention that one
of the defective conditions might have been caused by the tenant is
unpersuasive. The owner submitted no documentation or evidence
below or with this petition substantiating this allegation. Accord-
ingly, the Commissioner deems this assertion to be without merit.
Finally, concerning the petitioner-owner's argument that the
Administrator failed to give it notice of the inspection, the
Commissioner finds that due process does not require that the owner
be informed that inspections are to take place or that it be sent
copies of the reports with an opportunity to rectify the condition
or to respond. The owner had adequate notice from the tenant's
complaint of conditions requiring its attention.
Division records indicate that the owner filed an application to
restore the rent which was granted on April 25, 1990, under Docket
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this
Order and Opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
LULA M. ANDERSON