GI610191RO
           
                                  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   SJR #:6836 Mandamus
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                             DOCKET NO.: GI610191RO  
                                                  
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                DOCKET NO.: GA630091B       
                    
               Multiverse Real Estate, Inc.                                  
              
                                                         
                                 PETITIONER  
          ----------------------------------x                      
                                                                       

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW     
                          
               On September 30, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed 
          a petition for administrative review of an order issued on 
          September 16, 1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 1064 Carroll Place, Bronx, New York, 
          Apartment 4-A, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner 
          was not maintaining certain services and ordered that the rent for 
          the subject apartment be reduced to the level in effect prior to 
          the last rent guideline increase which commenced before the 
          effective date of the order.

               Subsequent thereto, the petitioner filed a petition in the 
          nature of mandamus in the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of 
          the Civil Practice Law and Rules.  The Court directed the Division 
          to expeditiously issue a determination of the petitioner's 
          administrative appeal. 

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

               The tenant filed a complaint of decrease in building-wide 
          services on January 14, 1992, in which, she alleged, among other 
          things, that the front entrance door was not secure and the 
          elevator does not operate properly. 

               The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on February 15, 
          1992, alleging that all repairs were made.  Included with the 
          answer was a copy of an invoice describing repairs made to the 
          vestibule door on December 6, 1991.












          GI610191RO




               The building was inspected on June 4, 1992 and revealed that 
          the vestibule door did not close, the door frame was out of 
          alignment, the door check was broken, and the lock was defective.  
          The inspector reported that the intercom works in conjunction with 
          the vestibule door.

               The owner was notified of the results of the inspection and 
          afforded an opportunity to correct the defective conditions.

               A second inspection on August 6, 1992 again revealed that the 
          vestibule door lock was defective.

               Based on that inspection, the Administrator directed the owner 
          to restore services and further ordered a rent reduction.

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserts, in pertinent part, 
          that the front door lock has been repaired many times and that it 
          is not possible to keep the lock in repair 24 hours a day, seven 
          days a week.  The owner enclosed a copy of a letter dated January 
          18,1992 advising the tenants of the owner's intention to install a 
          new magnetic lock.

               The petition was served on the tenant on October 23, 1992 and  
          the tenant did not answer the petition.

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

               Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, requires the 
          DHCR to order a rent reduction upon application by a tenant where 
          it is found that the owner has failed to maintain required 
          services.  Required services are defined by Section 2520.6(r) to 
          include repairs and maintenance.

               A review of the file reveals that at the time of the 
          inspection on August 6, 1992, front door vestibule door lock was 
          defective.

               The owner's statement on appeal that "there are intervals 
          between repairs and one of these intervals evidently occurred on 
          August 6, 1992" is an admission that repairs to the front door lock 
          are repeatedly required and the owner's expressed intention to 
          install a more secure lock evinces the need to correct the 
          condition in a more effective manner.










          GI610191RO

               The record reveals that the owner did not submit any evidence 
          that the service deficiency noted in the inspection report had been 
          corrected prior to the issuance of the appealed order.

               It is apparent that the owner had ample opportunity to make 
          the repair in a workmanlike manner, but had failed to do so before 
          the issuance of the Rent Administrator's order.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator 
          properly based the determination on the entire record, including 
          the results of the on-site physical inspection conducted on August 
          6, 1992 and that pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Code, the 
          rent reduction ordered by the Administrator, based on a 
          determination that the owner had failed to maintain services, was 
          warranted.  The owner has offered insufficient reason to disturb 
          the Rent Administrator's determination.

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

               ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          denied, and Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
          affirmed.

               Upon a restoration of services the owner may separately apply 
          for a rent restoration.


          ISSUED:                                    






                                                  ___________________        
                                                  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