FL 130154-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.: FL 130154 RO
VRETTOS REALTY COMPANY DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: EG 130123 B
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 23, 1991, the above named petitioner-owner filed
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued November 26, 1991. The order concerned
housing accommodations located at 45-59 45th Street, Woodside,
N.Y. The Administrator ordered a building-wide rent reduction
for failure to maintain required services.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
appeal.
This proceeding was commenced when tenants of 25 of the 51
apartments in the subject building joined in filing a Statement
of Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide Services on July 3,
1990 wherein they alleged the following services deficiencies:
1. Water back-up in basement causes mosquito
infestation
2. Vermin infestation throughout building
3. Front entrance door opens too easily; inadequate
security
4. Defective intercoms
5. Dirty public areas
6. Incinerators locked so garbage must be taken out
7. Garbage area in yard filthy
8. Inadequate hall lighting
9. No adequate roof fire door
10. Walls throughout building dirty and in need of
painting
11. Water leaks in ceilings
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and
afforded an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on
September 12, 1990 and stated that the basement was kept clean by
the building superintendent, that an exterminator is under
contract to correct any problems with infestation, that the front
entrance door is in good working order, that the intercom is
serviced when necessary, that the incinerators have been shut
down for 30 years but the garbage is taken downstairs to be
deposited in large containers for later disposal, that the
building contains fluorescent lighting, that the roof door area
is properly maintained, that the public areas were painted in
1988 and that the roof had been repaired. The owner also stated
that many of the complaining tenants did not, in fact, desire a
rent reduction and submitted a copy of a statement signed by
eleven tenants stating that they did not know what they were
signing when they signed the complaint. Finally, the owner
submitted signed work orders, from various tenants, which were
offered to show that repairs are made when necessary.
In a letter to the Administrator dated October 22, 1990, a
representative from the Commission on Human Rights, Neighborhood
Stabilization Program, advised that certain tenants were coerced
by the owner into withdrawing their names from the complaint and
wished to be reinstated
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the
subject building. The inspection was conducted on September 16,
1991 and revealed the following:
1. Evidence of accumulation of rubbish and foul odor
in basement
2. Evidence of roach and rodent infestation in
basement
3. Public areas and lobby require cleaning
4. Roof door not fire-proof
5. Sixth floor ceiling waterstained
The following services were found to have been maintained:
1. Evidence of trash disposal/removal service being
maintained
2. Vestibule door is self-closing and self-locking
3. No evidence of water seepage/accumulation in
basement
4. Intercom system operative
5. Adequate lights throughout public areas
The Administrator issued the order here under review on November
26, 1991. Rent controlled tenants were granted a rent reduction
of $22.00 per month and rent stabilized tenants were granted a
rent reduction of the most recent guideline adjustment. The
reduction for rent stabilized tenants was effective September 1,
1990.
On appeal the owner states that "There is no rubbish or foul
odor in the basement. There is no roach or rodent infestation in
the basement. Public areas and lobby are clean. The roof door is
fireproof. The sixth floor ceiling is not waterstained."
One tenant filed a response on February 13, 1992 and stated
an objection to the petition based on mouse infestation.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
denied.
The owner's statement in the petition is unsupported by any
evidence to rebut the inspector's report. Nor does the owner
state when the conditions have been corrected. If the owner is
claiming that the conditions did not exist at the time of the
inspection, than it is settled that the inspector's report is
entitled to more probative weight than the statements of a party
to the proceeding. If the owner is claiming that the conditions
have been subsequently corrected, then the appropriate remedy is
to file for rent restoration. The order here under review is
affirmed.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City 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
|
