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 and perfected a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued February 5, 1992,
concerning the housing accommodations known as 400 East 58th
Street, Apt. 2F, 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 the entire apartment to be
in need of painting and plastering; kitchen, bathroom cabinet and
bathroom linen closet doors that did not close properly; a radiator
valve that did not work properly, mice droppings in the kitchen; a
missing smoke alarm; weak intercom audio from the lobby; and
unpainted plaster around the kitchen sink. 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 the petition for administrative review, the owner requests that
the Rent Administrator's order be reversed. The owner states, for
the first time on appeal, that repairs were substantially completed
or were in progress at a pace convenient to the tenant when the
Rent Administrator's order was issued. The owner also states that
the tenant agreed to accept a painting allowance from the owner in
lieu of painting, that the tenant failed to allow certain repairs
needed until after the inspection, and that certain repairs have
since been completed.
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
The owner's assertion and submissions on appeal, of various repairs
completed or in progress when the Rent Administrator issued the
order below, are beyond the scope of review, which is strictly
confined to issues and evidence submitted to the Rent Administrator
for consideration. In addition, the owner's submission on appeal,
consisting of the affidavit of the owner's superintendent stating
that repairs were completed pursuant to the Rent Administrator's
order, fails to set forth a cause of action since the order was
correct when issued based on the record below.
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