Docket Number: FH 410081-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.: FH 410081-RO 
                                                
            KINGSWOOD MANAGEMENT CORP./          DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
            JONATHAN LEVIN,                      DOCKET NO.: CK 410739-S

                                                 SUBJECT PREMISES:
                                                 225 East 57th St., Apt. No. 17E
                                 PETITIONER      New York, NY 10022
          -----------------------------------X                           
            
            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On August 6, 1991, the above-named owner filed a  timely  petition
          for administrative review of an order  issued  on  July  3,  1991,
          concerning t e  housing  accommodations  relating  to  the  above-
          described docket number.  

          This administrative appeal is being  determined  pursuant  to  the
          provisions of 9 NYCRR 2520.6(r) and 9 NYCRR 2523.4.

          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 November 10, 1989 by  the
          tenant filing a complaint  asserting  that  the  owner  failed  to
          maintain certain services in the subject apartment.

          In its answer filed on January  18,  1989,  the  owner  denied  as
          service reductions the  allegations  set  forth  in  the  tenant's
          complaint.

          Thereafter on June 7, 1991, the subject apartment was inspected by 
          D.H.C.R. which confirmed the existence of defective conditions.

          Based on said inspection, the Administrator directed  on  July  3,
          1991 restoration of these services and further ordered a reduction 
          of the stabilized rent.

          In this petition, the owner states in substance that  it  was  not
          notified of the  inspection  report  and  thus  not  afforded  the
          opportunity to repair these  defective  conditions  prior  to  the
          issuance of the Administrator's order.  The petitioner cit s  ARL-
          60350-Q wherein a proceeding was remanded to the Administrator  on
          the basis that an inspection request and report was not served  on
          the owner prior to the issuance of the  Administrator's  order  to
          provide the owner with an opportunity to comment on the inspection 
          report.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion
          that this petition should be denied.






          Docket Number: FH 410081-RO


          The tenant's complaint  is  sufficient  notice  to  the  owner  of
          alleged defective conditions.  The owner was  made  aware  of  the
          defective conditions since the record established that  the  owner
          by its attorney in the proceeding below did  answer  the  tenant's
          complaint.  

          Administrative policy and precedent do not require that  an  owner
          in this type  of  case  involving  decreased  services  within  an
          individual apartment be given a copy of  the  inspection  results,
          and  the  Courts  have  upheld  this  procedure   (Empress   Manor
          Apartments v. NYSDHCR, 538 N.Y.S.2d 49, 147 A.D. 2d 642,  February
          21, 1989).  The Commissioner notes that the Administrative  review
          opinion referred  to  by  petitioner  concerning  a  rent  control
          apartment was issued shortly after the Division's takeover of  the
          duties of the Rent Commissioner, more than five years ago.  It  is
          not and has not been the Division's  practice.   In  this  regard,
          the Commissioner notes that  an  inspection  report  is  the  work
          product of a DHCR staff member who conducts an on-site  inspection
          to determine questions of fact which arise after joinder of  issue
          in a proceeding alleging decreased services.  The inspector's work 
          product is an impartial report or finding, and is not  a  pleading
          or a probative submission by a party to a proceeding which if  not
          served for response  would  be  a  fatal  defect  in  denying  due
          process.

          Moreover, the owner  had  nineteen  months  from  service  of  the
          tenant's complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order 
          to investigate  the  tenant's  complaint  and  to  make  necessary
          repairs, but the owner failed to do so. 

          Accordingly,  the  owner  was  not  denied  due  process  and  the
          Administrator's order based on the inspection was correct.

          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:

                                                                        
                                          ELLIOT SANDER
                                          Deputy Commissioner