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.: EA110143RO
EL-KAM REALTY CO.
c/o Jacobs and Zinns RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: CK110419S
640 Tenth Avenue
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on November 28, 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 November 1, 1988 by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
On December 6, 1988, the owner was served with a copy of the
Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the apartment was conducted on
November 15, 1989 by a DHCR inspector who confirmed the existence of
By an order dated November 28, 1989, the Administrator determined
that the ceiling in the living room was sagging, hanging loose and
about to fall; the bathroom floor was cracked; the installation of
the intercom and the fuse box was done in an unworkmanlike manner,
the plastering sloppy and requiring a paint job. The Administrator
directed the restoration of services and ordered a reduction of the
In its petition for administrative review, the owner contends in
substance that the conditions were mere deficiencies, not warranting
a rent reduction; and that the owner was "in the process of making
various repairs". The owner submitted no documentation to support
these contentions, even though the owner requested numerous
extensions to supplement the petition.
In answer, the tenant asserted in substance that services were not
restored in his apartment.
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
The owner's petition does not establish any basis for modifying or
revoking the Administrator's order which determined that the owner
was not maintaining required services based on the results of the
November 15, 1989 on-site inspection which confirmed the existence
of defective conditions, warranting a rent reduction.
Furthermore, the allegations and submissions in the petition are
beyond the scope of administrative review, which is limited to the
issues and evidence before the Administrator.
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so
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,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA