EH 510222 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.: EH 510222 RO

                                               DISTRICT RENT ORDER
               Fred Leist,                     DOCKET NO.: EC 410454-S

                                               Premises: 612 West 144th St.
                                                         Apt. B6
                                                         New York, 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.

          On February 6, 1990, the tenant commenced the proceeding below by 
          filing a complaint asserting that the owner  failed  to  maintain
          the following services in the subject premises: dangerous  stove;
          refrigerator which leaked water since it  was  brought  into  the
          premises; water leaking in the kitchen and bathroom; big hole  in
          the bathroom wall which exposed persons  using  the  bathroom  to
          dangerous situations.

          The owner failed to answer the tenant's complaint even though  he
          was given the opportunity to do so.

          On May 17, 1990,  an  inspection  of  the  subject  premises  was
          conducted by a DHCR inspector.  The inspection report stated  the
          following: no defects noted to the stove; no water leaks  evident
          in the kitchen or bathroom; no evidence of hole in bathroom wall; 
          no evidence of exposed plumbing  or  wiring;  a  leak  which  was
          evident at the bottom of the refrigerator.

          On July 26, 1990, the Administrator directed restoration  of  the
          defective condition  and  further  ordered  a  reduction  of  the
          stabilization rent.


          In his petition for administrative  review,  the  owner  requests
          that the order here under appeal be completely reversed.  In  the
          petition,  the  owner  contends  that  on  May  29,   1991,   his
          refrigerator service  contractor  made  a  service  call  to  the
          subject premises and checked the refrigerator drain and found  no
          sign of a water leak.  The owner goes on to  contend  that  there
          were other service complaints alleged by the tenant, all of which 






          EH 510222 RO
          were found  to  be  maintained  and  satisfactory  upon  physical
          inspection.  In addition, the owner states  that  the  inspection
          report never stated  that  the  refrigerator  was  defective  and
          inoperable.  The owner goes on  to  state  that  he  removed  the
          refrigerator from the subject  premises  and  placed  it  in  the
          superintendent's apartment and after three weeks  there  was  not
          one drop of water seen.

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

          With respect to the owner's contention regarding the refrigerator 
          service call of May 29, 1991, the  Commissioner  notes  that  the
          owner failed to submit this evidence  while  the  proceeding  was
          pending before the Administrator even though he had ample time to 
          do so.  The Commissioner will not entertain this  defense  raised
          for the first time on appeal.

          With respect to the owner's contentions regarding  the  condition
          of the refrigerator and the content of the inspection report, the 
          Commissioner notes that the physical inspection was conducted  by
          a DHCR inspector, an independent observer who was not a party  to
          the proceeding here under review.  The inspector reported that  a
          leak was evident at the bottom  of  the  refrigerator.    owner's
          Given these  facts,  the  Commissioner  finds  that  the  owner's
          contentions regarding the refrigerator's condition and content of 
          the inspection report are belied by the record below.

          Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the owner  has  offered
          insufficient reason to disturb the Administrator's order, and  it
          should be affirmed.

          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 District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:
           
                                                  ELLIOT SANDER
                                                  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