FF 610314 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 610314 RO
MARTIN SHAPIRO DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: EK 610712 S
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 17, 1991 the above named petitioner-owner timely
refiled a Petition for Administrative Review of an order of the
Rent Administrator issued May 2, 1991. The order concerned
housing accommodations known as Apt. 3 located at 2 East 167th
Street, Bronx, N.Y. wherein the Administrator order a rent
reduction for failure to maintain required or essential services.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
appeal.
The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a Statement
of Complaint of Decrease in Services on November 29, 1990. She
alleged the following services deficiencies:
1. Rat and rodent infestation
2. Wall under kitchen sink in need of
repair
3. Floor and wall bathroom tile in need
of repair
4. No smoke detector
5. Entrance door frame needs repair
6. Gas stove leak
7. Inoperative refrigerator
8. Defective electric wall outlets
9. Bathroom wood saddle needs to be
replaced
10. Window sashes in all rooms need
repair
11. Wood floor in front of bathroom
hall needs repair
12. Kitchen sink corroded
13. Kitchen cabinets need replacement
14. Wood floor by entrance door in need of
repair.
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and
afforded an opportunity to respond. On December 13, 1990 an
answer was filed wherein the owner stated that: (1) all repairs
were made, (2) pursuant to a "so-ordered" stipulation of an
action in Housing Court, dated December 3, 1990, the owner agreed
to complete all repairs by December 8, 1990 and the tenant was
granted one month's rent abatement thereby negating the need for
the Administrator to order one and, (3) the tenant has agreed
that all repairs have been made. The owner attached a copy of
the stipulation, work orders for repairs in the apartment, and a
statement by an exterminator attesting to the availability of
extermination service in the building.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the
subject apartment. The inspection was conducted on April 17,
1991 and revealed the following:
1. Evidence of roach and rodent infestation
2. Kitchen wall cabinet door will
not close.
The following services were found to have ben maintained:
1. No evidence of defective kitchen sink
wall
2. Bathroom floor and wall tiles repaired
3. Apartment door frame not defective
4. No gas leak found in stove
5. No evidence of refrigerator defect
6. No defects in electrical outlets
7. Bathroom door saddle replaced
8. All apartment windows are new
9. Bathroom floor replaced
10. No evidence of defective sink
11. Apartment floors not defective.
The inspector noted that the tenant had a smoke detector,
but that the detector was not installed. The Administrator
ordered a rent reduction, effective January 1, 1991, based on the
inspector's report.
On appeal, the owner states that the kitchen wall cabinet
has been replaced with a new one and that exterminator services
are provided on a regular basis but the exterminator saw no sign
of infestation. The tenant filed a response to the petition on
July 14, 1991 wherein she stated that the kitchen cabinet had not
been replaced. She also stated that there are visible signs of
rats and water bugs in the apartment, that the exterminator does
not come at regular intervals and, when extermination services
are provided, the chemicals used do not kill the vermin.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
denied.
With regard to the kitchen cabinet, the owner has not
submitted any evidence to establish that the cabinet was replaced
before the Administrator's order was issued and the tenant
maintains that this repair has yet to be done. If the owner has
restored all services the Administrator found to have been
decreased, the owner may file for rent restoration. With regard
to the issue of roach and rodent infestation, the tenant
similarly disputed the owner's statement, in the petition, that
effective extermination services are being provided. The
Commissioner finds the inspector's report dispositive on the
issue of the existence of the infestation. The owner is under a
duty to correct the problem and eliminate the infestation in an
effective manner which may require more frequent treatments by
the exterminator and/or the use of different or stronger
chemicals. The order here under review is affirmed.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
