DOC. NO.: FC 430187-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. FC 430187-RO
CEDAR MANAGEMENT CORP., : DISTRICT RENT ORDER
PETITIONER : DOCKET NO.: EH 420070-B
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 18, 1991, the above named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order issued on February 13,
1991, by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New
York, NY concerning housing accommodations known as 112 West Houston
Street, New York, New York, various accommodations.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner-owner filed a petition in the
Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and
Rules requesting that the Court direct the DHCR to expeditiously
determine the petitioner's administrative appeal. The proceeding was
remitted to the DHCR for consideration of the administrative appeal.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced by one rent controlled tenant filing a
complaint of a decrease in building-wide services alleging, among
other things, that there was rat infestation at the subject premises.
In response, the owner asserted, among other things, that there was no
rat infestation problem and that monthly exterminating services are
provided.
On October 22, 1990 a physical inspection of the subject premises was
conducted which revealed, among other things, that there was evidence
of rat infestation in the rear yard.
DOC. NO.: FC 430187-RO
On October 30, 1990 the owner was advised of the results of the
physical inspection and afforded an opportunity to correct the
conditions reported. In response, the owner repeated its earlier
assertions.
On January 15, 1991 a physical inspection of the subject premises was
conducted which revealed that there was evidence of rat infestation in
the backyard area and that all other reported conditions had been
corrected.
In the order appealed herein, the Rent Administrator determined, based
upon the results of the above mentioned physical inspections, that the
owner had failed to maintain services and reduced the rents of the ten
rent controlled tenants residing in the subject building by $6.00 per
month, effective on the first rent payment date following the issue
date of the order.
In this appeal, the owner contends, in substance, that there is not
and never was a rat infestation problem in the backyard, that the
garbage is kept in the backyard area and one or two rats may appear if
it is not picked up by the Sanitation Department for several days but
such does not constitute an infestation problem and is not a service
reduction and that there was no rat infestation at the time the order
was issued. The owner also contends that the amount of the rent
decrease ordered by the Rent Administrator was not determined in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the Rent and Eviction
Regulations.
In response to the owner's petition one tenant asserted, in substance,
that there was evidence of rodent infestation at the subject premises
and another tenant asserted that there was no evidence of rat
infestation.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
Section 9 NYCRR 2205.1 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations requires
an owner to maintain services. Section 2202.16 of the Regulations
provides, in pertinent part, that if the owner fails to maintain
essential services, the Rent Administrator may order a decrease in
maximum rent in an amount which the Administrator, in his discretion,
may determine.
The evidence of record, which includes the reports of the physical
inspections conducted at the subject premises, reveals that the owner
DOC. NO.: FC 430187-RO
was not maintaining services. The Commissioner notes that the fact
that exterminating services are provided is not sufficient to warrant
revocation of a finding of a decrease in services if infestation or
evidence thereof still exists. Accordingly, the Rent Administrator
properly reduced the rent of the subject apartment.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
right to file an application for a restoration of rent, if the facts
so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
