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 on March 12, 1992, concerning the housing
accommodations known as 400 East 58th Street, Apartment 7A, New
York, 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 by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain services in
the subject apartment. In pertinent part, the tenant complained of
defective windows and doors.
In an answer, the owner denied the allegations set forth in the
complaint or asserted that the tenant did not cooperate with the
owner's efforts to ascertain conditions requiring repairs, or
otherwise asserted that all required repairs had been or will be
Thereafter, the DHCR conducted an inspection of the subject
apartment. The DHCR inspector found that two bedroom windows were
old and worn and that a bathroom cabinet door did not close
tightly. Other services were found to be maintained.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and
further ordered a reduction of the controlled rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner reiterates
statements to the effect that work had progressed as the tenant
permitted access. In addition the owner submits a work order dated
March 16, 1992 to establish that repairs were made promptly after
the owner received the Rent Administrator's order.
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 that the owner was not maintaining 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 not rise to the level sufficient to trigger a "no access"
inspection, detailed in Policy Statement 90-5: Arranging Repairs
No Access Inspections.
The further evidence that repairs were completed subsequent to the
Rent Administrator's order does not warrant reconsideration of the
order since evidence of repairs conducted subsequent to the order
fails to set forth a cause of action.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the City Rent and
Eviction Law and Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is denied, and
the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA