STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER DF 410488-S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On August 6, 1990, the above-named owner filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on July 5, 1990, by a
Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation known as
Apartment 10-C, 100 Riverside Drive, New York, New York wherein
rent was reduced due to a diminution of service.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues
raised by the petition for review.
On May 30, 1989, the subject tenant filed an application for a
rent reduction based on the owner's alleged failure to maintain
service alleging, inter alia, peeling paint and plaster in the
bathroom and on one wall in the bedroom, which, she alleged was
due to "persistent leaks".
On July 19, 1989, the owner interposed an answer to the tenant's
complaint wherein it alleged, inter alia, that painting and
plastering, "is now being done." The owner further alleged that
there were no leaks into the apartment and that all external
leaks had long been fixed.
On April 27, 1990, a physical inspection of the subject apartment
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 June 5, 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.
In its petition for administrative review the owner requests
reversal of the Rent Administrator's order alleging that its
contractor did all of the painting and plastering on July 20,
1989 and that the items cited occurred after the work was done.
The owner further alleges that it was unaware of the fact that
conditions had recurred until after it had received the Rent
Administrator's order. The owner alleges that the required work
was done again on July 29, 1990. Attached to the petition are
photocopied bills of the owner's contractor dated July 20, 1989
and July 29, 1990.
In answer to the owner's petition the tenant alleges, inter alia,
that the problems have been well known to the superintendent of
the building for years and that she had reported the conditions
a number of times.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be denied.
The Commissioner notes that on July 19, 1989 the owner alleged
that all external leaks into the apartment had been fixed and
that plastering and painting was then being done. Yet, an
inspection carried out nine months later revealed that the con-
ditions complained of still existed.
Moreover the owner had twelve months from the date of service of
the tenant's complaint until the issuance of the administrator's
order to investigate the tenant's complaints and to make the
satisfactory repairs, but failed to do so.
Pursuant to Section 2523.14(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a
tenant may apply to the DHCR for a reduction of the legal
regulated rent to the level in effect prior to the most recent
guidelines adjustment and the DHCR shall so reduce the rent for
the period for which it is found that the owner has failed to
maintain required services.
Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include re
pairs and maintenance.
The Commissioner finds that the administrator properly based his
determination on the entire record; including the results of the
on-site physical inspection conducted on April 27, 1990 and that
pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, the administrator was
mandated to reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had
failed to maintain services.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
rights as they may pertain to an application to the Division for
a restoration of rent based upon the restoration service.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby