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.: GA210040R0
755 Ocean Realty/
J.K. Management/Jacob Kempler, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: FB210447S
PETITIONER PREMISES: Apt. 6G
755 Ocean Ave.
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 18, 1991 concerning the
housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
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 this administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on February 11, 1991 by a tenant
filing a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain
various services in the subject apartment.
In an answer filed on March 25, 1991, the owner denied the
allegations in the complaint or otherwise asserted that repairs had
been performed. The owner attached copies of a December 6, 1989 and
March 21, 1990 work orders indicating that the lights, the outlets,
the sink, the ceiling, the smoke alarm had been checked; the mildew
was removed; and the entire apartment was painted.
On November 29, 1991, a physical inspection of the subject apartment
was conducted by a DHCR staff member who reported that the ceiling
and walls of the hallway closet next to the main bathroom are water-
stained due to leaks from the roof; that three other hallway closets
are cracking and peeling paint; that the master bedroom ceiling and
walls are water-stained, blistered and peeling paint and plaster;
that the dining room ceiling was improperly painted, partly
plastered, not sanded before painting; that the kitchen ceiling is
cracking; that the living room ceiling is cracking, improperly
sanded before painting; that the second bedroom ceiling is cracking;
that the apartment entrance door frame is broken; that the door lock
apartment entry is broken; that the door apartment knob is missing;
that the door apartment latch is missing; that the apartment door
panel is loose; and that there are roaches and mice in the kitchen.
By order dated December 13, 1991, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services based on the inspection results and further
ordered a reduction of the stabilized rent.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends that
DHCR never physically inspected the apartment and that the
Administrator ignored the copies of signed work orders concerning
the apartment. The owner attached copies of two signed work orders
submitted in the proceeding below and three unsigned, undated work
orders for the first time on appeal.
In answer, the tenant questioned ever signing these work orders and
listed seven defective conditions as a result of unworkmanlike
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
The owner's petition fails to rebut the Administrator's
determination based on the November 29, 1991 on-site inspection
finding numerous defective conditions in the apartment. The record
clearly shows that the Administrator considered the alleged copies
of signed work orders and thereafer scheduled the on-site inspection
which contradicted many of the alleged repairs in the work orders.
Accordingly, the order appealed from was in all respects proper and
is hereby sustained.
The three unsigned, undated and questionable copies of work orders
submitted for the first time on appeal fail to disturb the results
of the on-site inspection. In addition, these papers are beyond the
scope of administrative review which is limited to the issues and
evidence before the Administrator.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this
Order and Opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby, is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA