STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                                  92-31 UNION HALL
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.:
               The 400 East 58th Street Co.,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.:


          The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
          review of an order issued January 31, 1992, concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 400 East 58th Street, Apt. 15F, New York, 
          New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined the tenant's 
          complaint of decreased services.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all 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 by filing a complaint 
          asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in 
          the subject apartment.

          In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the 
          complaint, or asserted that the tenant failed to cooperate with the 
          owner's efforts to ascertain conditions requiring repairs, or 
          otherwise asserted that required repairs had been or would be 

          Thereafter, the DHCR conducted an inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The DHCR inspector reported plaster cracks in the 
          living room walls and ceilings and kitchen ceiling, kitchen living 
          room and foyer walls and ceiling that required painting, broken 
          bathroom tiles, evidence of mice droppings in the kitchen, a leaky 
          cold water faucet, kitchen cabinet doors that did not close shut, 
          a small hole in one bedroom floor board and a broken lock on the 
          kitchen door leading to the hall.
          The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and 
          further, ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.


          In the petition for administrative review and supplements thereof, 
          the owner states that the tenant would not permit the landlord to 
          make various repairs to the apartment until the DHCR had inspected 
          and/or had issued the Rent Administrator's order, that various 
          repairs were nevertheless completed prior to the order as evidenced 
          by work orders signed by the tenant on January 13, and 16, 1992, 
          that the tenant had cancelled orders to paint the tenant's 
          apartment on November 26 and December 11, 1992, which the tenant 
          did not reschedule, and that the tenant would not permit access for 

          The owner states that the remaining repairs including painting and 
          plastering were completed by May 21, 1992 and that any delays in 
          completing repairs were due to the tenant's lack of or reluctant 
          cooperation up until that time.

          The tenant denied the owner's allegations of the denial of access.  
          The owner's reply thereto reiterates the owner's previous 

          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 a proper basis 
          for modifying or revoking the 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 evidence the owner submitted in the 
          proceedings below did no rise to the level sufficient to trigger a 
          "no-access" inspection, detailed in Policy Statement 90-5:  
          Arranging Repairs No Access Inspections.

          The additional evidence of attempts to gain access and of repairs 
          completed prior to the order, submitted for the first time on 
          appeal, could not be considered since scope of review is limited to 
          issues and evidence submitted to the Rent Administrator for 
          consideration.  The further evidence that repairs were completed 
          subsequent to the Rent Administrator's order does not warrant 
          reconsideration of the order, since the determination was correct 
          when issued based on the record presented below.

          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 provisions of the City Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, it is

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



                                             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