STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: FC110310RO
DOCKET NO.: EI110746S
PREMISES: 58-35 Granger St.
Apt. # 6M
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN
PART AND MODIFYING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on February 19, 1991
concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above-
described docket number.
The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order
The Commissioner had reviewed all of the evidence in the
record and has carefully considered that portion of the record
relevant to the issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on September 25, 1990 by a rent-
stabilized tenant who filed a complaint, asserting that the
building conditions are such that it is practically unsafe to come
and go after dark; that the door locks are broken; that the garbage
chute areas are filthy; that rain seeps through the roof; that the
building is infested with rats and roaches; that the refrigerator
is out of service for a year; that the elevators are inoperative;
that the hallways are unlit at night; and that the entrance door
has constantly broken locks.
On October 29, 1990, the Division transmitted to the owner a
copy of the tenant's complaint.
In an answer filed on November 7, 1990, the owner stated that
he has an exterminating company under contract to service the
apartment bi-monthly; that the elevator service under contract has
confirmed all elevators working properly; that the superintendent
has assured him that the building is in proper and sanitary
condition; and that the refrigerator is scheduled for repair on
November 9, 1990.
In another answer filed on November 16, 1990, the owner stated
that the tenant has a new refrigerator and that the door lock has
been fixed. The owner attached a copy of the tenant's signed
acknowledgment that the new refrigerator had been installed, the
window lock replaced and the bathroom painted.
Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted on January 11, 1991 by a Division staff member who
reported that there are water stains on the ceiling and wall inside
the entry hall closet; that the entrance door does not close
properly; that there was a roach crawling in the kitchen; and that
there is no evidence of a defective refrigerator.
On February 1, 1991, the same Division staff member inspected
the subject apartment and reported that the entrance door lock is
The Administrator determined that the apartment entrance door
does not close properly, that there is evidence of roaches in the
kitchen, and that there are water stains on the ceiling and wall
inside the entry hall closet. The Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered the reduction of the stabilized
In the petition for administrative review, the owner argued
that the tenant has signed on November 9, 1990 an acknowledgment
that repairs had been completed to satisfaction. The owner also
asserted that the finding of a defective door not closing properly
was not originally complained of by the tenant.
On April 8, 1991, the Division mailed to the tenant a copy of
the owner's petition.
In answer, the tenant asserted in substance that the defective
conditions had never been repaired, that he has not signed an
acknowledgment that the defective entrance door, vermin infestation
and water stains had been taken care of by owner.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the
opinion that the owner's petition should be granted in part and
that the Administrator's order should be modified accordingly.
The Administration's determination was based upon a staff
inspector's report which found defective conditions within the
apartment and is correct in that respect.
However, the finding that the apartment entrance door does not
close properly was not originally complained of by the tenant. The
tenant originally complained that the door locks are broken and
that the entrance door has constantly broken locks. The February
1, 1991 inspection found that the entrance door lock is working
Accordingly, the Commissioner is of the opinion that the
Administrator's order should be modified to the extent of deleting
the finding that the apartment entrance door does not close
The Commissioner notes that the tenant's November 9, 1990
acknowledgment of repairs does not refer to the defective
conditions found by inspection - rather to the new refrigerator,
replaced window lock and the painted bathroom. The owner's
allegation that the tenant had already acknowledged repairs of the
defective conditions is accordingly without merit.
The Commissioner also notes that the owner's application for
rent restoration (FK110040OR) was granted on March 17, 1993.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
granted in part to the extent that the Administrator's finding that
the apartment entrance door does not close properly is deleted from
the order, and that the Administrator's order is modified
Joseph A. D'Agosta