Docket Number: FB 210067-RO
                                 STATE OF NEW YORK
                           OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

        APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: FB 210067-RO
             BENSON ASSOCIATES,                DRO DOCKET NOS.:
                                                          ZEC 210033-OR
                              PETITIONER    :             ZCK 210170-S

        On February 8, 1991, the above-named  owner  filed  a  Petition  for
        Administrative Review against an order issued on January  29,  1991,
        by the Rent Administrator of the Gertz Plaza, Jamaica, District Rent 
        Office, concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above 
        described docket number.  

        This administrative appeal  is  being  determined  pursuant  to  the
        provisions of 2520.6(r) and 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code.
        The issue herein is whether defective conditions upon which an order 
        was  issued  reducing  the  rent  have  been  corrected,  warranting
        restoration of the legal regulated rent.

        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 administrative appeal.

        On March 2, 1990, the owner filed an application to restore rent  on
        the basis of the tenant's unreasonable refusal of access.  The owner 
        alleged that on February 21, 1990, its plumber  advised  the  tenant
        that the tenant-installed shower head was improper  and  caused  the
        conditions set forth in the original complaint; that this  condition
        could be corrected by installing an approved shower head;  and  that
        the tenant advised the plumber and the owner's agent that the tenant 
        would purchase his own shower head and have it properly installed at 
        his convenience.

        On April 27, 1990, the tenant filed an answer, alleging that he  was
        not offered by the plumber another shower head; that  he  has  since
        changed the shower head; and that the problems of extremely  varying
        water temperature and dirty water are still there.

        On  November  26,  1990,  an  inspection  of  the  subject   housing
        accommodation was conducted by a DHCR inspector  who  confirmed  the
        existence of defective conditions.


        Docket Number: FB-210067-RO

        On January 29, 1991, the Administrator issued an order based on  the
        inspection, finding that the "shower head cannot be  regulated"  and
        that the "mixer is defective."

        In this petition, the owner alleged in substance that  the  tenant's
        refusal of  access  is  unreasonable;  that  the  tenant  improperly
        installed his own shower head, causing the defective  conditions  in
        the original complaint; and that the plumber advised the tenant that 
        he could correct this condition by  installing  an  approved  shower
        head on behalf of the owner, but the tenant  refused  to  allow  the
        plumber to do same.

        The Commissioner is of the opinion  that  this  petition  should  be
        remanded for further processing.

        The record shows that the owner submitted below and in this petition 
        a February 26, 1990 letter from a plumbing service, stating that  on
        February 21, 1990, a service call was made; that the plumber advised 
        the tenant at that time that  the  extreme  changes  of  temperature
        during showering are caused by the tenant-installed shower head; and 
        that this particular shower head has  a  smaller  opening  than  the
        norm, causing the defective  changing  temperatures.   Although  the
        owner alleges that the tenant refused the plumber's offer to install 
        an approved shower head, such allegation is categorically denied  by
        the tenant in answer.

        The record also shows that the  tenant  answered  that  he  was  not
        offered by the plumber an alternative shower head.

        In view of the foregoing, the Commissioner does not  find  that  the
        tenant unreasonably  refused  access.   Because  the  problem  still
        exists and because the problem is  not  solved  by  reimbursing  the
        tenant the cost of the tenant-installed shower head, this proceeding 
        is remanded to effect complete and verifiable repair of  the  defect
        in question pursuant to Policy Statement 90-5,  "Arranging  Repairs"
        and "No Access Inspections."

        THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law  and  Code,
        it is

        ORDERED, that the owner's petition  be,  and  the  same  hereby  is,
        granted to the extent of remanding this proceeding to  the  District
        Rent Administrator for further processing in  accordance  with  this
        Order  and  Opinion.   The  District  Rent   Administrator's   order
        continues in effect until a new order is issued upon remand.


                                        ELLIOT SANDER
                                        Deputy Commissioner

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name