EB230027RO; EB230108RT

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

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: EB230027R0;     
          PETER KRAUS,                                      
                                                 DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET NO.: DE230084B            
                          OWNER-PETITIONER       PREMISES: 855 East 19th. St.
                                                           Brooklyn, New York     





                                       IN PART 

          The above-named owners and tenants filed timely petitions for 
          administrative review of an order issued on January 23, 1990 
          concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above- 
          described docket number wherein the Administrator ordered a rent 
          reduction based on a finding of a decrease in services.

          These petitions are consolidated because they involve common issues 
          of law and fact.

          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 this administrative appeal.
          This proceeding was commenced on May 11, 1989 by various tenants 
          filing a complaint of a decrease in numerous building-wide services. 

          EB230027RO; EB230108RT

          The tenants alleged that due to the inadequate exterminator 
          services, there is severe vermin and rodent infestation; that the
          elevator cab is torn and the indicator lights broken; that the 
          vestibule door has been defective for 2 years; that the roof leaks 
          in Apt.# 6E, 6F, 6G and 6J; that the building has been filthy since 
          December 1987 when the porter had been removed; that the vestibule 
          directory should be updated; that there is graffiti throughout the 
          building interior; that the roof alarm is inoperative; that the 
          apartment repairs were not timely or professionally done; that the 
          lobby has holes and leaks in the ceiling; and that the interior 
          painting is cosmetically horrendous.

          The Division transmitted to the owner on June 13, 1989 a copy of the 
          tenants' complaint.

          In an answer filed on June 30, 1989, the owner denied all the 
          allegations as set forth in the tenants' complaint and otherwise 
          asserted that all these building-wide services are being provided.

          Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the subject building  was 
          conducted on November 21, 1989 by a Division staff member who 
          confirmed the existence of some of the defective conditions 
          complained-of by the tenants.

          Based on the inspection report, the Administrator determined that 
          the lobby, the fifth (5th) and the sixth (6th. floor) ceilings have 
          peeling paint; that the roof alarm is defective; and that the 
          following services as quoted below are maintained:

                    "1.  There is no evidence of roach and rodent
                         infestation in the public areas.
                     2.  Elevator is operating properly, and elevator
                         cab is not torn. Indicator lights are operative.
                     3.  Vestibule door is not defective.
                     4.  There is no evidence of roof being defective.
                     5.  There is no evidence of leakage on top floor,
                         public hallway and stairway ceilings and walls.
                     6.  Building is clean.
                     7.  Vestibule directory is updated.
                     8.  There is no graffiti throughout the interior area of  
                         the subject premises.
                     9.  Lobby ceilings do not have any holes." 

          The Administrator directed the restoration of services and ordered 
          the rent reduced for stabilized tenants who joined in the complaint 
          to the level in effect prior to the most recent guidelines 
          adjustment, effective July 1, 1989.
          The maximum legal rent of all rent-controlled tenants on the 
          building was reduced by $8.00 ($4.00 for ceiling defects and $4.00 
          for the defective roof alarm).

          EB230027RO; EB230108RT

          The owner alleged in its petition that it had not received notice 
          from the tenants' complaint about peeling ceilings; that the roof 
          alarm was installed by the owner in September 1987 and not a 
          required service as indicated by a copy of a June 18, 1984 building 
          registration; and that both conditions (the peeling ceilings and the 
          roof alarm) have already been corrected.

          The tenants contend in their petition that the order appealed from 
          should be modified to include (1) defective elevator (water 
          emanating into the elevator cab from the top of the elevator), (2) 
          defective roof (current roof leak in Apt.#6G), (3) vermin and rodent 
          infestation in the public areas of the building, and (4) dirty 
          building (no porter to clean).

          The tenants assert that the Administrator's order should be amended 
          to include eight tenants who signed the complain but were omitted 
          from the order.

          In answer to the tenants' petition, the owner states that the four 
          defective conditions raised by the tenants had already been found by 
          the staff inspector to be non-existent; and that the tenants never 
          complained of a roof leak in Apt.#6G.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
          the owner's petition should be denied, and the tenants' petition 
          should be granted in part.

          The Administrator's determination was based upon a staff inspector's 
          report which found defective conditions within the building. The 
          determination was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.

          The owner's assertion that it received no notice from the tenants' 
          complaint about peeling ceilings is without merit. The record 
          establishes that the tenants' complaint alleged, among other things, 
          roof leaks, as well as holes in the lobby ceiling and leaks in the 
          lobby ceiling. The Commissioner is of the opinion that these 
          allegations are sufficient notice  to the owners that  peeling 
          ceilings need to be repaired.

          The allegation that the defective roof alarm is not a required  
          service is inapplicable when the owner admitted installing this 
          service in September 1987. The Commissioner is of the opinion that 
          ancillary services, especially of this nature which promote the 
          security and well-being of the tenants, must be maintained once 
          The tenants' contention that four other conditions should be 
          included in the Administrator's order is without basis in the 
          record. These conditions were found to have been repaired and   
          maintained on November 21, 1989 by the Division inspector.

          The tenants are correct, however, that the Administrator's order 

          EB230027RO; EB230108RT

          erroneously omitted several tenants who signed the complaint.  The 
          supplemental signature pages attached to the complaint consisted of 
          several pages, one for each of the six floors in the building.  The 
          rent reduction order for stabilized tenants issued by the Adminis- 
          trator excludes all tenants on the sixth floor, indicating that that 
          signature page was overlooked.  The order is, therefore, amended to 
          include a rent reduction equal to the most recent guidelines 
          adjustment which commenced before the effective date of the order 
          (July 1, 1989) for Apts. 6-B, 6-C, 6-D, 6-F, 6-G, 6-H, 6-J, and 6-K.
          It is noted that Apt. 6-E is included in the order for rent 
          controlled tenants, as are Apartments 3-A and 3-J which the tenants 
          also claim in their petition were omitted from the order.

          Inasmuch as the owner alleges in the petition that the peeling 
          ceilings and the roof alarm have already been corrected, this Order 
          and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owners' right to file 
          a de novo application for rent restoration based upon the 
          restoration of services, if the facts so warrant.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code 
          and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is 

          ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          denied, and that the tenants' petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          granted in part, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby, is affirmed, as amended.


                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Deputy Commissioner




          EB230027RO; EB230108RT




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