STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
METRO MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INC., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONER DF 430017-B
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On July 19, 1990, the above-named owner filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on July 10, 1990 by a
Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations known as
Apartments 5-B and 1-D. 301 Tenth Avenue, New York, New York,
wherein rents were reduced due to a diminution of service.
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 for review.
On May 27, 1989 the stabilized tenant of Apartment 5-B filed an
application for a rent reduction based on the owner's alleged
failure to maintain service.
The owner interposed an answer to the tenant's complaint wherein
it alleged that all services were being provided.
On February 9, 1990 a physical inspection of the subject apart-
ment was carried out by the Division of Housing and Community
Renewal (DHCR). The inspector, in his report, noted that the
complained of conditions were as alleged by the tenant.
On July 10, 1990 the Rent Administrator issued the order here
under review finding that a diminution of services had occurred
and reducing the tenant's rent to the level in effect prior to
the last rent guideline increase which commenced before the
effective date of the rent reduction. The Rent Administrator
further ordered a monthly reduction of the rent of the tenant of
Apartment 1-D in the amount of seven dollars ($7.00).
In its petition for administrative review the owner reques s re-
versal of the Rent Administrator's order alleging, in substance,
that all problems had been corrected.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be granted in part.
The Commissioner notes that the only signatory to the instant
complaint was the stabilized tenant f Apartment 5-B. Accord-
ingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner was not put on
notice that any other tenant had been joined in this proceeding.
Hence, the Rent Administrator's reduction of rent for the tenant
of Apartment 1-D was a violation of due process and mu t be re-
In regard to the tenant of Apartment 5-B the Commissioner finds
that the order under review should be affirmed.
The owner's petition does not make clear whether it is the
owner's contention that repairs had been made before the building
was inspected or the order was issued or whether the contention
is that repairs were made following the issuance of the Rent
Administrator's order. If it is the former, then the owner's
allegation is belied by the report of the agency inspector. If
it is the latter, then the Rent Administrator's order reducing
the rent was nevertheless correct when issued, and this order is
issued without prejudice to the owner filing a restoration of
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabili
zation Law and Code and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
New York City, 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, modified to the extent of revoking the rent reduction
which had been ordered for Apartment 1-B. In all other respects
the order is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner