STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: GA110224RO
KREISEL COMPANY, INC.
DOCKET NO.: FF110072S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on December 17, 1991,concerning the
housing accommodations known as 215-19 48th Avenue, Apt.# 3E,
Queens, New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined the
tenant's complaint of decreased services.
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 July 4, 1991 by filing a
complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment, in that there were leaks in the
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or otherwise asserted that all required repairs had been
or will be completed. The owner alleged that roof repairs had been
completed in 1989. The owner also submitted an April 26, 1990 rent
restoration order for a prior rent reduction, setting forth that
the tenant had postponed repair of cracks and painting of the
living room ceiling.
Thereafter, the DHCR conducted an inspection of the subject
apartment. The inspector confirmed tenant's complaints of leak
stains, cracks, and peeling paint and plaster in the bedroom
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further, ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner reiterates
assertions below that the cause of the conditions was rectified by
roof repairs completed in June 1989, and that the tenant refused
and continued to refuse the owner's attempts to paint.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523. 4 of the Rent Stabilization code, DHCR is
required to order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant,
where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required
services. The owner's petition does not establish any basis for
modifying or revoking the Rent Administrator's order which
determined that the owner was not maintaining required services
based on a physical inspection confirming the existence of
defective conditions in the subject apartment for which a rent
reduction is warranted.
The owner's contention, below and on appeal that the roof was
repaired in 1989 was not responsive to the tenant's complaint of
water leaks in 1991.
The owner's assertion that the tenant refuses to provide the owner
access to paint the apartment also fails to address the tenant's
The owner may file a rent restoration application if the facts so
warrant. If the tenant fail to provide access to correct the
conditions cited, a "no-access" inspection may be conducted. It is
noted, however, that in order to schedule a "no-access" inspection,
the owner must comply with the requirements set forth in Policy
Statement 90-5: Arranging Repairs No Access Inspections. In
pertinent part, the owner must submit proof that the owner was
unable to obtain access even though two letters were sent to the
tenant attempting to arrange access dates. Each letter must have
been sent at least eight days before the proposed date for access,
and the second letter must have been sent by certified mail.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
by the filing of the petition is vacated upon issuance of this
order and opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of Rent Stabilization
Law & Code, it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be denied and that the Rent
Administrator's order be affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA