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.:DG410197RO     
                                                        
          Alexander Breet Assoc. Inc. c/o          RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
          Finkelstein, Borah et al.,               DOCKET NO.:CE410294S      
                                                       
                                                   SUBJECT PREMISES:
                                                      1175 Park Avenue
                                                      Apt. 12A1
                                                      New York, NY    
                                PETITIONER     
          -----------------------------------X                           

               ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

            The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
            review of an order issued on June 13, 1989 concerning the housing 
            accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.  

            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 May 13, 1988 asserting that 
            DHCR requested him to file this new complaint because water damage 
            to the living room ceiling and walls was already covered by the 
            Administrator's order under Docket No. LS004511-S issued on October 
            23, 1985; and now that all the rooms in the subject apartment were 
            damaged by water leaks.

            In answer, the owner denied the allegations and otherwise asserted 
            that the tenant refused access.

            On May 16, 1989, Notices of Inspection (For Access) were mailed by 
            DHCR to the tenant and the owner, advising them to be at the 
            premises on May 31, 1989, 9:00-9:30 AM for the tenant to provide 
            access and for the owner's worker(s) to perform the repairs at the 
            time. The notices further state that "failure of the owner and/or 
            his repair person(s) to be present and ready to attend to repairs 
            and/or restore services, or failure of the tenant to keep this 
            appointment will result in a determination based solely on the 
            evidence presently in the record."

            Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject apartment was 
            conducted on May 31, 1989 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed that 
            the apartment ceilings and walls were peeling paint and plaster; 
            that the foyer closet was blistered and peeling paint and plaster.
            The inspector further noted that the tenant was present but the 
            owner failed to show up in this inspection for access.

            By an order dated June 13, 1989, the Administrator directed the 
            DG410197RO







            restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.

            In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the tenant 
            cannot get a double rent reduction for the same decreased services 
            and that the tenant refused access.

            In answer, the tenant denied the allegations and otherwise asserted 
            that he was advised by DHCR to file a new complaint because the 
            defective conditions were no longer in the living room walls and 
            ceilings; and that he never refused access but negotiated, for the 
            sake of his wife who was seriously ill, various appointments with 
            the owner by doing many of the repairs himself.

            After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
            the petition should be denied.

            The record establishes that the parties were notified of a scheduled  
            inspection (For Access), advising them that "failure of the owner 
            and/or his repair person(s) to be present and ready to attend to 
            repairs and/or restore services, or failure of the tenant to keep 
            this appointment will result in a determination based solely on the 
            evidence presently in the record." The inspection report on that 
            scheduled appointment stated that the apartment ceilings and walls 
            were peeling paint and plaster; that the foyer closet was blistered 
            and peeling paint and plaster; that the tenant was present but the 
            owner failed to show up in this inspection for access.

            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 
            inspection (for access) which confirmed the existence of defective 
            conditions, warranting a rent reduction, and the owner's failure to 
            attend to these conditions. 

            Further, the owner's petition fails to rebut the contention that the 
            findings of the May 31, 1989 inspection are different and not 
            duplicative of the previous conditions in the living room walls and 
            ceiling.

            The owner is advised to file a rent restoration application if the 
            facts so warrant.

            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, 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