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.:EJ510224RO
(Refile of EH510203RO)
128 Ft. Washington Partners c/o RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
Metro Management, DOCKET NO.:DG520297S
128 Ft. Washington Avenue
New York, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner refiled and perfected a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on July 31, 1990 concerning
the housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
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.
The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a complaint asserting
that when the windows were replaced, the screens were thrown out but
not replaced; that the owner agreed to replace the screens for a
charge; and that the owner failed to do the same.
In answer, the owner asserted in substance that the old windows were
not well insulated and replaced; that screens were never part of the
newly installed insulation; and that the tenant should pay for the
On May 1, 1990, an inspection of the subject apartment was conducted
by a DHCR staff member who confirmed that nine (9) windows have no
By an order dated July 31, 1990, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that there is
nothing in the law that the owner is required to provide screens for
DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the tenant.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
the Administrator may impose a rent reduction when there has been a
reduction in services. The owner's petition does not establish any
basis to modify or revoke the Administrator's determination based on
the May 1, 1990 inspection which confirmed the lack of screens, a
defective condition warranting a rent reduction.
The Commissioner notes that the owner does not dispute the
contention that screens were once provided, removed when new windows
were installed, and never replaced. In addition, neither the owner's
failure to register a service nor the tenant's failure to object to
same is a bar to subsequent complaints of decreased services. Once
the owner actually provided a service, the owner has a duty to
maintain same regardless of the registration of this service.
The rent will be restored only when an owner's application to
restore rent is filed and granted. The owner is advised to file such
an application if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations and
Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA