DHCR Decisions
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.:FC210362RO
(Refile of FB210032RO)
Highland Boulevard Realty Co., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:DL210581S
SUBJECT PREMISES:
200 Highland Boulevard
Apt. 1G
Brooklyn, NY
PETITIONER
-----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner refiled and perfected a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on January 17, 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 December 27, 1989 by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner asserted in substance that the tenant refused
access.
DHCR mailed to the owner a copy of Policy Statement 90-5 (Arranging
Repairs; No Access Inspections), informing the owner of the
requirements for scheduling a No Access inspection.
Upon receipt from the owner of necessary papers indicating attempts
to repair the conditions, DHCR scheduled a No Access inspection on
December 7, 1990, informing the parties beforehand that the tenant
should be ready to provide access to the owner's workers who should
also be ready to perform the repairs at the time.
On December 7, 1990, a No Access inspection of the subject apartment
was conducted by a DHCR staff member who reported that the bathroom
ceiling was repaired in an unworkmanlike manner; that the ceiling is
bulging, cracked and not painted; that there are water stains and
mildew on ceiling; that the wall tiles are missing next to the
toilet; and that the bathroom and bedroom electrical fixtures are
missing globes. The inspector stated that the tenant's father who
was present allowed access, and that the owner and the owner's
FC210362RO
workers were absent at the time of inspection.
By an order dated January 17, 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 after the tenant delayed access.
In answer, the tenant asserted that the defective conditions
continue to exist.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
In the instant case, DHCR scheduled a No Access inspection on
December 7, 1990, informing the parties beforehand that the tenant
should be ready to provide access to the owner's workers who should
also be ready to perform the repairs at the time. During the No
Access inspection, a DHCR staff member confirmed the existence of
various defective conditions, and reported that the tenant's father
who was present allowed access, and that the owner and the owner's
workers were absent at the time of inspection.
Accordingly, the owner's petition does not establish any basis to
modify or revoke the Administrator's determination based on the
December 7, 1990 inspection which confirmed (1) the existence of
defective conditions warranting a rent reduction, and (2) the fact
that the owner and the owner's workers were not ready to perform
repairs at the No Access inspection.
The owner is advised to file a rent restoration application if the
facts so warrant.
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, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|