STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:   
                 PANKAJ K. PRASAD,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      FK110184S 


          On July 6, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition 
          for administrative (PAR) review of an order issued on June 17, 
          1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommoda- 
          tion known as 35-45 94th Street, Jackson Heights, New York, 
          Apartment 3-C, wherein the Administrator determined that the rent 
          for the subject apartment should be reduced to the level in effect 
          prior to the last rent guideline increase, which commenced before 
          the effective date of the order based upon a showing that not all 
          services were being maintained.  The Rent Administrator's deter- 
          mination was based on an inspection held on March 6, 1992.  The 
          report, however, showed that the owner had corrected other service 

          The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issue raised by the administrative appeal.

          The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced 
          the rent of the subject rent stabilized apartment.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner maintained that all work specified 
          in the tenant's complaint was corrected at the time of the inspec- 
          tion and that the tenant signed a work order specifying that the 
          work was done.


          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

          Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a 
          tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
          (DHCR) for a reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level in 
          effect prior to the most recent guideline adjustment, and the DHCR 
          shall so reduce the rent for the period for which it is found that 
          the owner has failed to maintain required services.

          Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

          An inspection conducted on March 6, 1992 confirmed the existence of 
          various service deficiencies, which were the subject of the ten- 
          ant's complaint filed on November 13, 1991.

          A copy of the tenant's complaint was mailed to the owner on 
          November 25, 1991 and the Rent Administrator's order was issued on 
          November 13, 1992.

          It is apparent that the owner had approximately twelve months to 
          attend to the complained-of-conditions, but had failed to do so, 
          prior to the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.

          The Commissioner notes that the subject tenant submitted an answer 
          on December 16, 1991, to the owner's PAR asserting that the owner 
          had not adequately addressed the service deficiencies.

          The Commissioner finds, therefore, that the owner has offered 
          insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's deter- 

          The Commissioner also finds that the Administrator properly based 
          his determination on the entire record, including the results of 
          the on-site physical inspection conducted on March 6, 1992 and that 
          pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, the Administrator was 
          mandated to reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had 
          failed to maintain services.

          The Commissioner has considered the owner's claim on appeal that 
          the tenant signed a work-order signifying that all repair work was 
          completed by the owner and rejects same.  The record demonstrates, 
          that the tenant signed a work-order for certain service items which 
          were not the subject of the Rent Administrator's rent reduction 


          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabiliza- 
          tion 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, 

          This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's 
          right to file the appropriate application with the Division for a 
          restoration of rent based upon the restoration of services, if the 
          facts so warrant.


                                                JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                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