FF 410268 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 410268 RO
Melohn Properties, DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR
DOCKET NO.: DH 410446 S
PETITIONER
-----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 14, 1991 the above-named petitioner timely refiled an
Administrative Appeal against an order issued on May 1, 1991 by
the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street,
Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
100 Riverside Drive, New York, New York, Apartment 5E.
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of Sections 2520.6, 2523.4 and 2529.6 of the Rent
Stabilization Code.
The issue herein is whether the District Rent Administrator's
order reducing rent pursuant to a service reduction complaint was
warranted.
The subject apartment was inspected on both August 7, 1990 and
March 13, 1991. Both inspections revealed peeling paint and
plaster in the bedroom and bathroom walls and ceiling. The 1990
inspector also noted moisture at the peeling sites.
In Order No. ZDH-410446-S issued May 1, 1991 the Rent
Administrator reduced the legal regulated rent due to the
reduction of services.
In this petition, the owner contends that the subject bedroom and
bathroom ceiling and walls were previously plastered and painted.
The owner also alleges lack of access to the apartment.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issue raised by the Administrative Appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on July 20, 1989 by the tenant's
filing of an individual statement of complaint of decrease in
services with the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
(DHCR). The tenant complained of peeling paint and plaster in
his apartment due to an active leaks.
The owner in his October 1989 answer stated that he had hired a
contractor to do exterior work at the building to cure a leak to
the subject apartment.
FF 410268 RO
The Commissioner's review of a petition for administrative review
shall be limited to facts or evidence before a Rent
Administrator. The owner did not raise the issue of lack of
access before the Rent Administrator, and therefore it can not be
considered in this petition.
Further both the owner and tenant contend the apartment has been
replastered on various occasions.
The fact that the second inspection in March 1991, some twenty
months after the initial tenant complaint still revealed peeling
paint and plaster in the bedroom and bathroom would indicate that
the owner never successfully cured the condition. Accordingly
the owner's arguments are not persuasive.
This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the rights
of the owner to file an application for restoration of rent,
after restoring the required services.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is denied,
and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
