FF 110303 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.: FF 110303 RO
                                                           
               C & S Associates,               DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR
                                               DOCKET NO.: ED-110245-S
           
                                   PETITIONER               
          -----------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On June 18, 1991 the above-named  petitioner  timely  refiled  an
          Administrative Appeal against an order issued on March 5, 1991 by 
          the  District  Rent  Administrator,  92-31  Union  Hall   Street,
          Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 
          214-23B Hillside Avenue, apt. B, Queens Village, New York.

          The Administrative Appeal is being  determined  pursuant  to  the
          provisions of 9 NYCRR 2520.6(r) and 9 NYCRR 2523.4.

          The issue herein  is  whether  the  District  Rent  Administrator
          properly determined the tenant's complaint of decreased services.

          A review of the record reveals that on April 20, 1990, the tenant 
          filed a complaint wherein she listed seven  deficient  conditions
          consisting of need for plaster and painting and  filling  ceiling
          holes, replacement of refrigerator gasket and  lining,  defective
          wall socket and exposed wiring, defective  apartment  door  lock,
          etc.

          The subject apartment was inspected by a DHCR inspector on May 8, 
          1990 who submitted a written report confirming several  deficient
          conditions and unworkmanlike repair attempts consistent with  the
          tenant's complaint.

          On March 5, 1991 the District Rent Administrator issued the order 
          appealed herein.  The District Rent Administrator's order reduced 
          the rent for the subject apartment to the level in  effect  prior
          to the last rent guideline increase which  commenced  before  the
          effective date of the order, such rent reduction being  effective
          as of May 1, 1990, the first rent payment day after the  Division
          informed the owner of the tenant's complaint.

          This order was based upon the above  mentioned  inspection  which
          revealed:

          1.   Unworkmanlike repair to living room hole in ceiling.
          2.   Peeling paint and plaster on living room ceiling and wall.
          3.   Refrigerator has defective gasket and  missing  inner  liner
               section, refrigerator lower panel needs adjustment.
          4.   Bathroom window has clear glass rather than opaque glass.
          5.   Apartment entrance door needs filling of space, a room  lock






          FF 110303 RO
               and securing of inner door molding.  Entrance door is also 
               warped.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner alleges that  the  District  Rent
          Administrator's order fails to reflect repairs made on  March  18
          and 19, 1991.  Said repairs were made within (30) thirty days  of
          the issuance date of the order.

          The tenant submitted a July 24,  1991  response  to  the  owner's
          administrative appeal wherein she stated, in substance, that  the
          refrigerator still had not been repaired.

          The District Rent Administrator properly determined the  tenant's
          complaint on the basis of physical inspection which revealed that 
          the owner had failed to provide and/or maintain certain  required
          services.  It was proper for the District Rent  Administrator  to
          reply upon the inspector's findings.

          The owner doesn't deny that these conditions existed between  the
          time of the tenant's initial complaint on April 20, 1990 and  the
          time of the order.

          The owner's own evidence indicates repairs  were  not  undertaken
          until after the order.

          Accordingly, the owner is not entitled to a reversal of the  Rent
          Administrator's order which  was  based  upon  the  reduction  of
          services existing at the time of the order.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's 
          right  to  file  for  a  rent  restoration  upon  restoration  of
          services.

          THEREFORE,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the   Rent
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this administrative appeal be, nd the  same  hereby
          is, denied, and that the order of the District Rent Administrator 
          be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:

           
                                                       JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                       Deputy Commissioner




    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name