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
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: EJ130015RO
LUCCHESE & VACCARO RENT
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On October 2, 1990 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued August 29, 1990. The order concerned various
housing accommodations located at 157-11 Sanford Avenue, Flushing,
N.Y. The Administrator granted, in part, the owner's application
for rent restoration.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
The owner commenced this proceeding on July 14, 1989 by filing
an Application for Rent Restoration wherein it alleged that it had
restored all services for which a rent reduction order had been
issued by the Administrator (Docket No. CJ130036B).
The tenants were served with copies of the application and
afforded an opportunity to respond. Various tenants filed responses
to the application with some stating that the owner had made
repairs and others stating that services had not been restored.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
building. The inspection was conducted on July 18, 1990 and
revealed that the elevator did not stop level at all floors, that
no inspection certificate was posted in the elevator cab, that the
elevator floor was missing pieces of linoleum tile and that
janitorial services were inadequate. The inspector also reported
that the front and basement doors had been repaired.
The Administrator issued the order here under review on August
29, 1990. Rent restoration was denied for rent stabilized tenants.
Rent controlled tenants were granted partial rent restoration in
the amount of $6.00 per month based on the report of the inspector.
On appeal the owner, through counsel, states that the order
here under review should be revoked because inadequate notice was
given to it with regard to the elevator defects. The owner also
states that janitorial services are adequate. The petition was
served on the tenants on November 21, 1990.
Various tenants filed responses wherein they stated, in sum,
that the order here under review should be affirmed.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
With regard to the owner's argument that janitorial services
are adequate, the DHCR inspector reported that hallways on various
floors required sweeping and mopping at the time of the inspection.
This report is entitled to more probative weight than the
unsupported allegation of the owner. The Administrator was correct
in denying rent restoration for rent stabilized tenants as well as
denying the $3.00 rent restoration for rent controlled tenants.
The Commissioner notes that the owner filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against the rent reduction ordered by the
Administrator (Docket No. DG130207RO). The Commissioner determined
that the Administrator erred in ordering rent reductions for the
elevator and front and basement door conditions. The
Administrator's finding regarding inadequate janitorial service was
affirmed. The rent reduction order was affirmed as modified for
rent stabilized tenants. With regard to rent controlled tenants
only, the Commissioner ordered that $14.00 of the rent reduction
ordered by the Administrator be revoked.
The Commissioner further notes that the Administrator granted
rent restoration for the remaining condition in an order issued on
January 29, 1990 (Docket No. FF130230OR).
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code and
Rent and Eviction Regulations 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 is,
affirmed as modified herein.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA