EG 210068-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
          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NO.:   
                                                  EG 210068-RO               
                
                  PEMBROKE ASSOCIATES,            
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S     
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      DC 210177-S
          ----------------------------------x



             ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                            

            On June 27, 1990, the above-named owner filed a Petition for 
            Administrative Review against an order issued on June 22, 1990, 
            by a Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations 
            known as 3060 Ocean Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment 3-S, 
            wherein the Administrator determined that the owner had not main- 
            tained services and accordingly reduced the rent.

            The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record 
            and has carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues 
            raised by the petition.

            The issue on appeal is whether the Administrator's order was cor- 
            rect.

            The applicable law is Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization 
            Code.

            The tenant originally commenced the proceedings on March 9, 1989, 
            by filing a complaint of a decrease in apartment services com- 
            plaining that the owner had failed to install window screens in 
            his apartment.




            On March 29, 1989 a copy of the complaint was sent to the owner 













          EG 210068-RO

            at the address given by the tenant in the complaint.  The owner 
            did not respond.

            As based on the findings of an inspection of the tenant's apart- 
            ment, the Rent Administrator issued the order here under review, 
            finding that a diminution of services had occurred, and reducing 
            the rent.

            In his petition, the owner calls for the revocation of the 
            Administrator's order because he had not been served with the 
            complaint and received no notice of the proceeding until the 
            issuance of the reduction order.  The owner states that the 
            address on the complaint was incorrect, as the owner had left 
            that location five years before and informed all tenants about it 
            at the time.

            The tenant claims in his answer that the owner was aware of the 
            situation because he had complained about the missing window 
            screens many times.

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

            The Commissioner notes that the record's copies of the notice and 
            answer forms that accompanied the tenant's complaint do not con- 
            tain the owner's correct name and address, and thus support the 
            owner's claim that he was never notified of the proceeding prior 
            to the issuance of the order.  Also tending to support the owner 
            are the Division's own records of building ownership, which show 
            a change of address in 1987.  The tenant's allegation that he had 
            personally requested the screens from the owner, even if 
            accepted without question, cannot be considered sufficient to 
            meet the due process requirements of timely and proper notice of 
            this proceeding.  Equally insufficient is the possibility put 
            forth by the tenant that the owner had his mail forwarded to his 
            new address; service of the notice cannot be presumed if the 
            record contains no evidence to document it.

            The Commissioner notes that the tenant concedes in his answer 
            that he has received screens  for all of his windows.

            Accordingly the Commissioner finds that the order under review 
            should be revoked.




            Should there be arrears owing to the owner as a result of this 
            Order and Opinion the tenant shall be permitted to pay off such 
            arrears in six (6) equal monthly installments beginning with the 
            first rent payment date after issuance of this Order.  Should the 







          EG 210068-RO

            tenant vacate, said arrears shall be payable immediately.


            THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Code, it is,

            ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted 
            and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
            hereby is, revoked.


            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