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.: EA610226RO
DOCKET NO.: DI610563S
2254 Cedar Ave.
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on January 18, 1990 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 September 28, 1989 by
filing a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain
certain services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner denied the allegations in the complaint and
otherwise asserted that all services were being maintained and
necessary repairs if any would be performed.
An on-site inspection of the apartment was conducted on December 29,
1989 by a DHCR inspector who confirmed that the bathroom shower
curtain rod was loose.
By an order dated January 18, 1990, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a reduction of the stabilized
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends that
all defective conditions were repaired; and a loose curtain rod is
not a decreased service, warranting a rent reduction.
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 determination that the owner was not
maintaining required services based on the results of the December
29, 1989 on-site inspection which confirmed the existence of a
loose bathroom shower curtain rod. The owner's replacement of the
shower curtain rod was done in an unworkmanlike manner. It was not
an abuse of discretion for the Administrator to deem this
potentially hazardous condition as a decrease in service.
Accordingly, the Administrator's determination was in all respects
proper and is hereby sustained.
The status of the owner's rent restoration applications is as
follows: EA610133OR denied on September 26, 1990; and EK610017OR
granted on September 19, 1991.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent reduction 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