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.: DG610114RO
DOCKET NO.: CI630078B
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued May 25, 1989 concerning the housing
accommodation known as 3220 Netherland Avenue, Apartment 6D, Bronx,
New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined the tenant's
complaint of decreases in building-wide services.
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 by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in
the subject building in that, among other things, the elevator
failed to stop level with the lobby and sixth floor landings.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or otherwise asserted that all required repairs had been
or will be completed.
Thereafter, the DHCR conducted an inspection of the subject
premises. The DHCR inspector confirmed that the elevator did not
stop level on the lobby and sixth floor landings. No other
defective conditions were found.
The Rent Administrator directed that the elevator levelling defects
be corrected and further, ordered a reduction of the stabilization
In the petition for administrative review, the owner, in substance,
reiterates that the owner's elevator contractor made the necessary
adjustments to restore proper elevator floor levelling.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the owner's petition should be denied.
The Commissioner notes that while the DHCR has the requisite
authority to investigate and to render a determination bearing on
a tenant's complaint of elevator defects, the DHCR recognizes that
the New York City Department of Buildings (DOB) has long-
established, comprehensive procedures and inspection programs in
place. Their staff is engaged carrying out these programs, and has
the necessary technical expertise to conduct periodic inspections;
to interpret and apply relevant codes, regulations and industry
standards; and to issue violations. Normally, in view of the
City's greater experience with elevator enforcement, the City is in
a better position than the DHCR to determine appropriate
performance standards and ancillary equipment for elevators of
varying age and manufacture. However, in this instance, the DOB
records reveal that no elevator inspections took place for the
subject building from the date the tenant filed the complaint on
September 22, 1988 through the issue date of the rent reduction
order, May 25, 1989. Consequently, reliance on the DHCR inspection
is warranted, and is sufficient to support a determination of
decreased elevator services warranting a rent reduction.
It is noted that the Rent Administrator issued an order on May 24,
1990 that granted the owner's rent restoration application under
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
LULA M. ANDERSON