STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: FF410631RT
JEFFREY H. ZIFFER
DOCKET NO.: DB430046B
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on May 24, 1991 concerning the housing
accommodations known as 355 East 72nd Street, New York, New York,
wherein the Rent Administrator dismissed the tenants' joint
complaint of decreases of various building-wide services.
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 tenants commenced this proceeding by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in
the subject premises.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint, or otherwise asserted that the conditions cited were
isolated occurrences or occurred in conjunction with renovations.
Thereafter, an inspection of the subject premises was conducted by
a DHCR inspector who confirmed the owner's contention that all
services were maintained adequately. The inspector reported that
storage space was available for the tenants' use, that the tenants'
had full use of two passenger elevators, that the public areas were
clean, that the building entrance canopy was adequate, and that a
package room was available.
The Rent Administrator, therefore, denied the tenant's request for
In this appeal, one tenant requests that the Administrator's order
be reversed, arguing in substance, that the Administrator failed to
make a determination for the periods prior to the issue date of the
order during which the tenants were deprived of services, that the
finding that the public areas were clear was not determinative of
the uncontested statement that the public areas are vacuum cleaned
less frequently, and that the tenants' services have been reduced
as a result of the relocation of the package room and storage
rooms, new carpeting installed without padding, and the
installation of a new modified entrance door canopy.
After careful consideration the Commissioner of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
The tenants' petition does not establish any basis for modifying or
revoking the Administrator's order, which determined that the owner
was maintaining services based on a physical inspection that found
no defective conditions. The DCHR will not order a rent reduction
if the record shows that services were restored, and are provided,
prior to the date a determination is issued.
Parenthetically, the Commissioner also notes that Section 2529.1 of
the Rent Stabilization Code provides that a PAR must be verified or
affirmed by each person joining therein, and that a PAR filed by an
alleged representative must include, at the time of filing the PAR,
written evidence of authorization to act in such representative
capacity for the purpose of filing the PAR. In light of the
instant determination, the question of whether the petition was
properly filed on behalf of other tenants, or whether the petition
should be considered to have been filed individually by a tenant in
the absence of such authorization, has been rendered moot, and need
not be considered herein.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
New York City, the City Rent Control Law, and the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is,
ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be, denied, and that the rent
Administrator's order be affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA