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.:FC110043RO     
                                                        
          Michael Pistilli,                        RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.:EI110461S      
                                                       
                                                   SUBJECT PREMISES:
                                                      58-35 Granger Street
                                                      Apt. 4B
                                                      Corona, NY 
                                PETITIONER     
          -----------------------------------X                           
              
            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 28, 1991 concerning the 
            housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket 
            number.  

            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 petition.

            The tenant commenced this proceeding on September 17, 1990 by filing 
            a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain 
            services in the subject apartment.

            In answer, the owner asserted that the apartment was being scheduled 
            for repair on October 30, 1990.

            On November 16, 1990, the owner submitted a copy of a work order 
            wherein the foreman and the tenant signed acknowledging completion 
            of repairs on October 30, 1990.

            Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject apartment was 
            conducted on January 15, 1991 by a DHCR inspector who confirmed that 
            the kitchen cabinets had mice droppings, that the peephole of the 
            apartment entrance door was defective, that the apartment intercom 
            was inoperative, and that the bathroom towel racks were broken.

            By an order dated February 28, 1991, the Administrator directed the 
            restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.

            In this petition, the owner contends in substance that all work was 
            done on October 30, 1990 when the tenant signed an acknowledgement 
            of completed repairs.

            DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the tenant.
            FC110043RO







            After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
            the petition should be granted in part and that the Administrator's 
            order should be modified accordingly.

            Based on the tenant's signed statement that all repairs had been 
            completed, the owner could reasonably assume that no further action 
            was required and that the processing before DHCR would be terminated 
            without a rent reduction. Due process requires that the tenant's 
            statement, if submitted by the owner,  be served on the tenant and, 
            if challenged, that the owner be advised that the complaint was not 
            being withdrawn.

            In the instant case, the physical inspection revealed that, contrary 
            to the owner's allegations and the statement allegedly signed by the 
            tenant, the necessary repairs were not done and could not possibly 
            have been done properly on October 30, 1990 if four months later,  
            the kitchen cabinets had mice droppings, the peephole of the 
            apartment entrance door was defective, the apartment intercom was 
            inoperative, and the bathroom towel racks were broken.

            A rent reduction for these conditions is required pursuant to 
            Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, but because of the 
            failure to verify the tenant's signature on the signed work order or 
            to advise the owner that the complaint was not being terminated, the 
            effective date of the rent reduction is hereby modified to March 1, 
            1991, the first of the month following issuance of the 
            Administrator's order, when the owner had actual knowledge that the 
            complaint was still active and that DHCR's physical inspection 
            revealed the need for additional repairs.

            The owner's rent restoration application (FC110055OR) was granted on 
            August 15, 1991.

            Rent arrears may be due the owner from the tenant as a result of 
            this Order and Opinion. Any arrears shall be paid in monthly 
            installments which shall not exceed the amount of the monthly rent 
            reductions revoked herein.

            THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code 
            and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is

            ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted in 
            part, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
            modified in accordance with this Order and Opinion.


            ISSUED:

                                                                          
                                                  JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                  Deputy Commissioner