ED 110384 RO
                                  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.: ED 110384-RO
                                                
                                                 DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
             ERICK LIEBENSTEIN,                  DOCKET NO.: DL 110107-S

                                                 PREMISES: 35-44 95th Street
                                                 Apt. 1A, Jackson Heights, 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 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  by  filing  a  complaint
          asserting that the owner had failed to maintain  certain  services
          in the subject premises.  Among the defects complained of  by  the
          tenant were cracks in  the  bedroom  walls,  and  defects  in  the
          apartment entrance door lock.

          In its answer to the tenant's complaint, the  owner  submitted  an
          affidavit from a carpenter stating that the lock was working,  and
          an affidavit from a painter stating that the  tenant  requested  a
          rescheduling of an appointment to paint the bedroom.

          Thereafter an inspection of the subject premises was conducted  by
          a D.H.C.R. inspector who  confirmed  the  existence  of  defective
          conditions.

          The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services  and
          further ordered a reduction of the regulated rent.

          In its petition for administrative review, the owner states that 
          the Administrator's order is "arbitrary, capricious  and  contrary
          to law" in that, the order finds that "the apartment entrance door 
          handle is missing."  If this was  the  case,  asks  the  owner  on
          appeal, how could  anyone  (including  the  DHCR  inspector)  gain
          access to the subject apartment?  The owner also charges that  the
          Administrator's order errs because it finds  evidence  of  peeling
          paint and plaster in the tenant's bedroom.  The owner charges that 
          this finding is arbitrary and  capricious,  since  in  its  answer
          below, owner had submitted the above-mentioned  affidavit  from  a
          painter, in which the painter contends he was denied access to the 
          apartment at the time of his visit.







          ED 110384 RO

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this  petition  should  be
          denied.

          Tenant complained below of defects in the front  door  lock.   The
          owner responded specifically to this complaint in its answer.  The 
          Commissioner is thus of the opinion that the owner was  on  notice
          that there were defects in the front door, and as such  it  cannot
          make the disingenous claims made on appeal.

          A review of the record reveals that  the  owner's  answer  to  the
          tenant's  complaint,  to  which  complaint  owner   appended   the
          painter's affidavit that tenant wished to reschedule the paint job 
          after February 1st, was served upon the DHCR on January 18,  1990,
          and that the inspection which disclosed, among other reductions in 
          service, peeling paint and plaster in the  tenant's  bedroom,  was
          conducted by the DHCR on February 28, 1990.  For the approximately 
          six weeks between the service of the owner's answer upon the  DHCR
          and the inspection of the subject premises, the owner  was  silent
          as to whether it had attempted to  reschedule  an  appointment  to
          paint the tenant's apartment.  It being an affirmative duty on the 
          owner's part to make repairs as soon as it learns of reductions in 
          service, the Commissioner is of the  opinion  that  the  owner  by
          apparently not seeking to reschedule an appointment, was  derelict
          in its duty to correct all defects of which it had notice.

          The Commissioner notes that on December 13, 1990 the  owner  filed
          with the DHCR an Application for Rent Restoration, and  that  this
          application was granted on April 3, 1991 under the  Docket  Number
          EL 110133-OR.

          THEREFORE,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and  the
          same  hereby  is,  denied,  and,  that  the  order  of  the   Rent
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:




                                                                        
                                          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