STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: EF430056RO
          258 RIVERSIDE DRIVE CORP.               RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: DI430006B


               On June 12, 1990 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued May 9, 1990. The order concerned various 
          housing accommodations located at 258 Riverside Drive, New York, 
          N.Y.  The Administrator directed restoration of services and 
          ordered a rent reduction for rent controlled tenants based on the 
          owner's failure to maintain required services.
               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 

               This proceeding was commenced on September 1, 1989 when one 
          tenant filed a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide 
          Services and alleged that the owner was not maintaining certain 
          required services including a defective building entrance door, 
          frayed electrical wires throughout the building and peeling paint 
          and plaster in the public areas including the laundry room.

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on December 
          1, 1989 and stated that the complaint should be treated as  
          individual and not building-wide since only one tenant signed, that 
          the tenant was not entitled to a rent reduction, that the items 
          complained of are duplicates of items complained of in other 
          proceedings and that it did not currently own the building.
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          building.  The inspection was conducted on March 14, 1990 and 
          revealed the following:


                    1.   Defective entrance door and door lock,

                    2.   Unsecured wires leading from roof to courtyard,

                    3.   Peeling paint and plaster in laundry room at rear 
                         of subject premises.

          All other services complained of were found to have been 

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on May 9, 
          1990.  A $14.00 per month rent reduction was ordered for rent 
          controlled tenants.  Rent stabilized tenants were not granted a 
          rent reduction but the Administrator issued an order directing 
          restoration of services. 

               On appeal the owner, as represented by counsel, states that 
          the order here under review should be revoked because only one 
          tenant filed the complaint and did not request a rent reduction.  
          The owner also states that the building in question is subject to 
          cooperative ownership and that any tenant who purchased an 
          apartment should not be entitled to a rent reduction.  Finally, the 
          owner argues that the conditions cited in the complaint do not 
          warrant the imposition of a rent reduction.  The petition was 
          served on the tenants on July 11, 1990.
               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted 
          in part and the order here under review should be affirmed as 

               The owner is correct in that only one tenant, who is rent 
          stabilized, filed this complaint and did not request a rent 
          reduction.  The Administrator should not have ordered a rent 
          reduction for the rent controlled tenants of the building.  The 
          $14.00 per month rent reduction ordered in this proceeding is, 
          therefore, revoked.

               With regard to the Administrator's directive to restore 
          services, the Commissioner has reviewed the complaint and the 
          report of the DHCR inspector.  The Administrator's findings were 
          within the scope of the complaint and amply supported by the 
          physical inspection described above.  That inspection was carried 
          out by a DHCR employee who is neither a party to this proceeding 
          nor an advocate.  The order directing restoration of services was 
          correctly issued and is affirmed.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code and 
          Rent and Eviction Regulations it is 
               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          granted in part, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and 


          the same hereby is, affirmed as modified herein.  Any arrears owed 
          based on the Commissioner's decision herein may be paid off in 
          installments of $14.00 per month or immediately if a tenant 


                                             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