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.: FL210061RO      
                               
                                                             
               SYDNEY CARTER,                    DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET NO.: FE210142S            
                        
                                PETITIONER       PREMISES: 146 Fenimore St., 
                                                           Apt. No. 4c,
                                                           Brooklyn, NY      
          -----------------------------------X                           

            
             ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


          The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
          review of an order issued on November 25, 1991 concerning the 
          housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket 
          number.  

          The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order was 
          warranted.

          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 this administrative appeal.

          This proceeding was commenced on May 2, 1991 by the tenant filing a 
          complaint which asserts that the owner failed to maintain various 
          services in the subject apartment. Relevant to the owner's petition, 
          the tenant complained that the toilet never flushes and a pale of 
          water has to be used all the time; that the face basin needs fixing; 
          and that the hall inside the aprtment is rotten, cracky and needs 
          fixing.

          On May 14, 1991, DHCR transmitted a copy of the tenant's complaint 
          to the owner.

          In answers filed on May 30, 1991 and June 10, 1991, the owner denied 
          the allegations as set forth in the tenant's complaint and otherwise 
          asserted that services are being provided and maintained in the 
          subject apartment.












          FJ 630091-RO
          FL210061RO


          Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the subject apartment was 
          conducted on November 8, 1991 by a DHCR inspector who confirmed that 
          the toilet flushometer does not have adequate pressure; that the 
          bedroom linoleum covering is worn and torn, exposing splintering 
          wooden slats; that the living room wooden slats have rough surfaces 
          and openings between slats; that the bedroom closet door does not 
          close properly; that the bathroom floor linoloeum covering is 
          peeling at the edges; that the hall floor linoleum tiles are torn 
          and worn; that the kitchen linoleum covering is torn and peeling ; 
          that the apartment hall top wall molding by the door that leads into 
          the living room is missing; that the bathroom shower mixing presure 
          is not adequate; that the bathtub does not drain properly; that the 
          bathroom tank has water leak around it; that there were mice and 
          roach droppings in the kitchen; that the kitchen cupboard doors were 
          warped.

          Based on the inspection, the Administrator directed on November 25, 
          1991 the restoration of services and further ordered the reduction 
          of the stabilized rent.

          In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends in 
          substance that all repairs have been completed, that the tenant is 
          responsible for alterations in the floor/covering of the apartment, 
          that the tenant caused these defective conditions, and that the 
          defective conditions in the toilet tank and in the hallway molding 
          were not in the original complaint.

          On January 7, 1992, DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the 
          tenant.

          In an answer filed on January 13, 1992, the tenant asserted in 
          substance that the problems continue to exist despite alleged 
          repairs.
           
          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
          the petition should be denied. 

          The Administrator's determination was based upon a November 8, 1991 
          on-site inspection which confirmed the existence of numerous 
          defective conditions. The determination was in all respects and is 
          hereby sustained.

          The alleged repairs by the owner were not raised in the proceeding 
          below prior to the issuance of the Adminstrator's order and are now 
          raised for the first time on appeal. In the same manner, the 
          allegations that the tenant caused the alterations in the floor 
          covering and other defective conditions are only raised for the 
          first time in the petition. Accordingly, these allegations are 
          beyond the scope of review, which is limited to the issues and 
          evidence before the Administrator.
                                        2    






          BL 120037 RT

          FL210061RO


          The Commissioner finds without merit the owner's assertion that the 
          toilet tank and the hallway molding were not mentioned in the 
          original complaint. The owner was put on ample notice when the 
          tenant asserted in the complaint that the toilet never flushes, that 
          she has to use a pail of water to flush it all the time, that the 
          face basin needs fixing, that the halls inside the apartment are 
          "very rotten, cracky and need to be fixed" and that "the entire 
          apartment need to be fixed and renovated."

          The owner filed a rent restoration application (FL210207OR) on 
          December 19, 1991.

          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 Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.


          ISSUED:



                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Deputy Commissioner


                                           









                                          3






    

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