DOCKET NO.: EL 610213 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.: EL 610213 RO

               Finkelstein Morgan                 DRO DOCKET NO.:
                                                  DK 610575 S 
                                                  
                                                   
                              PETITIONER
          -------------------------------------X
                             

          ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING                                 


               On December 17, 1990 the above-named owner filed a Petition 
          for Administrative Review (PAR) against an order issued on 
          December 5, 1990 by the District Rent Administrator at Gertz 
          Plaza, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations 
          known as 960 Grand Concourse Apartment 5H Bronx, New York wherein 
          the Administrator reduced the tenant's rent on a finding of a 
          reduction of services.

               The applicable law is Section 2523.4 of the Rent 
          Stabilization Code.                     

               The issue on appeal is whether the Administrator's order was 
          proper.                                                

               The tenant commenced these proceedings on November 29, 1989  
          by filing a complaint alleging various reductions in service.      
                                                              
               In its answer, dated January 8, 1990, the owner stated that 
          repairs would be made.                                             
                                   
               An inspection was conducted on May 1, 1990 by a member of 
          the Division's inspection staff.  The inspector confirmed the 
          existence of some of the conditions claimed by the tenant, and 
          found that other complained-of conditions did not exist.

               The owner responded to the inspection report on July 24, 
          1990, by submitting to the Administrator a copy of a work order 
          signed by the tenant on January 17, 1990, wherein the tenant 
          stipulated that repairs had been performed to his satisfaction













          DOCKET NO.: EL 610213 RO



               A second inspection as conducted on November 16, 1990 by a 
          member of the Division's inspection staff.  The inspector found 
          that despite the repairs claimed by the owner below, the original 
          malfunction had either recurred or had never been repaired 
          properly.
           
               On December 9, 1990, the Rent Administrator issued an order 
          based on the report of the physical inspection, reducing the 
          legal regulated rent by the percentage of the most recent 
          guidelines adjustment for the tenant's lease which commenced 
          before January 1, 1990, the effective date of the order, and 
          directing the owner to refund to the tenant all amounts collected 
          in excess of the reducing rent since the above-mentioned 
          effective date.

               In its appeal, the owner includes a copy of a work order by 
          the tenant on July 24, 1990, wherein the tenant stipulates that 
          defects found in the May 1, 1990 inspection have been repaired to 
          his satisfaction.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that these proceedings 
          should be remanded to the District Rent Administrator for further 
          consideration to determine whether the work order submitted below 
          on July 24, 1990 is sufficient evidence upon which the owner's 
          petition can be adjudicated.  

               Per DHCR policy an owner's petition will be granted if the 
          owner submits below a work order, signed by the tenant, by which 
          means the tenant states that repairs were done to his 
          satisfaction.  Although this was apparently done in the instant 
          case a review of the record reveal that subsequent inspection 
          found the complained of condition still in existence.

               Owner's submission of a signed work order at PAR cannot be 
          considered by the Commissioner, because said work order was 
          available for submission to the Administrator but was not 
          submitted below.  Accordingly to DHCR procedure, evidence that is 
          available but is not submitted below cannot be submitted for the 
          first time on appeal.
               
               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, Chapter 403, Laws of 1983, as amended 
          by Chapter 102, Laws of 1984, and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it 
          is












          DOCKET NO.: EL 610213 RO

               ORDERED, that this petition be and same hereby is granted to 
          the extent of remanding this proceeding to the District Rent 
          Administrator for further processing in accordance with this 
          order and opinion.  The Administrator's order is hereby revoked.  
          Any arrears owed by the tenant as a result of this order shall be 
          paid by the tenant to the owner in equal monthly installments 
          over the course of the next twelve months.

               ISSUED:




                                                                           
                                                  ELLIOT SANDER
                                                  Deputy Commissioner