Docket Number: FE 620306-RO
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.: FE 620306-RO
JOSHUA LEIBOWITZ/ DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
FINKELSTEIN MORGAN REAL ESTATE, DOCKET NO.: DL 620169-S
PETITIONER : 960 Grand Concourse,
------------------------------------X Apt. No. 5I, Bronx, NY 10451
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
AND REVOKING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
On May 28, 1991, the above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on May 20, 1991, concerning
the housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
This administrative appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations.
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 original proceeding was commenced on December 7, 1989 by the
tenant filing a complaint asserting that the owner failed to
maintain certain services in the subject apartment.
Although the owner was duly notified to do so, the owner failed to
respond to the tenant's complaint.
In an answer form (RTP-3A) filed on January 12, 1990, the tenant
wrote "I wish to discontinue my complaint against the landlord. The
tenant's committee president held meetings and I was pushed into
filing this complaint. I have never had a problem with the landlord
or agent and anytime something was wrong, it was fixed."
Thereafter on May 8, 1991, an inspection of the subject apartment
was conducted by a D.H.C.R. inspector who confirmed that the
"(b)edroom window on left side - bottom sash is tight and hard to
open" and that "the (h)all has peeling paint on ceiling."
The Administrator directed on May 20, 1991 restoration of these
services and further ordered a reduction by $5.00 per month of the
legal regulated rent.
In this petition, the owner alleged in substance that the tenant did
not request a rent reduction in its original complaint; that all
repairs were completed in or about March 1990; and that the tenant
discontinued its complaint on January 12, 1990.
Docket Number: FE 620306-RO
Although duly notified to do so, the tenant failed to reply to the
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
this petition should be granted and the Administrator's order
The record clearly shows that the tenant withdrew its complaint in
the proceeding below. Said withdrawal was not disputed by the
tenant in this petition. Accordingly, the Administrator's order is
However, the owner failed to prove that the services referred to by
the inspection report had been restored. The tenant is advised to
file a complaint based on decreased services if said conditions
still exist. It is noted that becau e the tenant here is rent-
controlled, the tenant need not formally request a rent reduction to
obtain such remedy.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted, and
that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby