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.:
EB420178RO
BECKER, REUBEN AND ASSOC./ RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
FINKELSTEIN, BORAH et al./ DOCKET NO.:
ROSENBERG AND ESTIS P.C., DA420234S
PREMISES: Apt.12B
258 Riverside Drive
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 January 16, 1990 concerning the
housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
number.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised in this petition.
The tenant commenced the proceeding on January 13, 1989 by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain various
services in the subject apartment.
On January 27, 1989, DHCR mailed to the owner a copy of the
complaint.
In an answer filed on February 21, 1989, the owner asserted that
the defective conditions were repaired. As to "damage to ceilings
in kitchen and pantry," the owner stated that the tenant was
"uncooperative" in arranging painting.
Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted on December 27, 1989 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed
the existence of defective conditions.
By an order dated January 16, 1990, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.
EB420178RO
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends in
substance that it never received the tenant's complaint and that
repairs were made prior to the issuance of the order.
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 the tenant's application
where it is found that the owner failed to maintain required
services.
The petition failed to establish any basis to revoke or modify the
Administrator's determination based on the December 27, 1989
inspection which confirmed the existence of defective conditions,
warranting a rent reduction. The contention that the owner never
received the complaint is belied by the record which shows the
owner answering the tenant's complaint. The claim of repairs is not
supported by the record. Accordingly, the order appealed from was
in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.
The owner may apply for a rent restoration if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
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
|
