FF 510287 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 510287 RO
Jack Ross, as Managing DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR
Agent for 2nd DOCKET NO.: DK 510122 S
Audubon Associates,
PETITIONER
-----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 10, 1991 the above-named petitioner 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
155 Audubon Avenue, New York, New York, Apt. 4C.
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 in October 1989 the tenant
filed a complaint wherein she listed several alleged deficient
conditions consisting of:
1) kitchen water leak
2) bathroom leak from ceiling and holes in walls
3) bathroom door doesn't close - toilet doesn't flush
properly; defective wash basin; and missing floor
tiles.
4) living room has broken radiator and walls are full of
holes
5) bedroom radiator leaking and making noise
6) bedroom walls are full of holes
7) broken window panes throughout apartment and no
extermination service.
The owner filed an answer in December 1989 contending that the
services alleged to have been reduced were restored, or were not
defective initially.
The subject apartment was inspected by a DHCR inspector on April
8, 1991 who submitted a written report confirming four deficient
conditions consistent with the tenant's complaint.
On May 1, 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
FF 510287 RO
effective date of the order, such rent reduction being effective
as of January 1, 1990, the first rent payment date after the
Division informed the owner of the tenant's complaint.
This order was based upon the above mentioned inspection which
revealed.
1. Ceiling in bathroom in area of light fixtures has water
stains.
2. Peeling paint and plaster on bathroom walls.
3. Wash basin is cracked and discolored.
4. No sign posted for exterminator service.
On appeal, the owner alleged the conditions cited in the order
have been repaired. The owner failed to provide any bills for
said repairs or specific dating of repairs. Further the owner in
his PAR failed to provide any evidence of providing extermination
service.
Accordingly, the owner is not entitled to a reversal of the Rent
Administrator's order which was based upon the report of an
impartial inspector which bears greater probative value than the
unsupported and self-serving statements of the owner.
The 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, and 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
|
