STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
The 400 East 58th Street Co.,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
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. 17F, 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 peeling or bubbling paint
and plaster in the kitchen, living room and bedroom ceilings, a
bedroom door and bedroom closet door that did not open and shut
properly, evidence of mice droppings, and a missing outlet face
plate. Other services were found to have been maintained.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further, ordered a reduction of the controlled rent.
In the petition for administrative review the owner states that the
tenant refused to provide the owner access to the apartment to
exterminate, to paint and plaster and to make repairs.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
the Rent Administrator may impose a rent reduction where there has
been a decrease in essential services, furnishings or equipment,
among other things. The owner's petition does not establish a
proper basis for modifying or revoking the Administrator's order,
which determined, based on an inspection, the existence of
defective conditions in the subject apartment for which a rent
reduction is warranted. The evidence the owner submitted below did
not rise to the level sufficient to trigger a "no-access"
inspection, detailed in Policy Statement 90-5: Arranging Repairs
No Access Inspection.
The owner's allegation that the tenant refused the owner access to
make or complete remaining repairs is beyond the scope of review,
which is strictly confined to issues and evidence submitted to the
Rent Administrator for consideration. The only additional evidence
submitted on appeal was an additional written request for access,
return receipt requested, dated after the Rent Administrator's
order. The owner's submissions were insufficient to have warranted
reconsideration in any event.
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