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.: GG210110RO
A & S Realty Co., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: EE210225S
PETITIONER PREMISES: 70 Prospect Park
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on June 17, 1992 concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.
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 May 15, 1990 by the tenant filing
a complaint asserting that the owner failed to maintain various
services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner asserted that it "moved forward diligently" and
"all repairs have been made." The owner also advised DHCR that the
tenant requested not to have her apartment painted until it is
convenient for her. Attached was a copy of a July 23, 1991 letter
from the tenant, stating that she was "under doctor's care and
unable physically to handle a painting job at the present time."
On November 21, 1991, DHCR mailed a copy of the answer to the tenant
who filed a statement saying that the information furnished by the
owner was correct.
A physical inspection of the subject apartment was conducted on
October 29, 1991 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed that the foyer
switch was defective; two living room window frames were rotted; the
kitchen window frame was rotted; the bedroom right window pane was
cracked; two bedroom window frames were rotted; the bathroom window
frame was rotted; and the bathroom outlet by the medicine cabinet
By an order dated June 17, 1992, the Administrator determined that
the foyer light switch, the apartment-wide window sashes and frames
and the bathroom electric outlet were not maintained. The
Administrator directed the restoration of services and ordered a
reduction of the stabilized rent.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends that
repairs were completed. Attached was a copy of the order appealed
from, with the tenant's signed and handwritten notation "work done".
Attached also was a copy of the "Sample Complaint Check-Off List",
with the notation "OK" signed by the tenant.
In answer, the tenant asserts in substance that the owner either
procastinated or ignored the complaint; and that the repairs were
done in July 1992, subsequent to the order's issuance.
In reply, the owner states that it is the tenant's frail health
which hampered the repairs and painting of Apt. 5D.
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
The Administrator's determination was based on the entire record
including the results of the physical inspection on October 29,
1991. The owner's petition fails to rebut the finding of defective
conditions which warrant a rent reduction. Accordingly, the
determination was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.
The Commissioner notes that the issue of painting was not covered by
the order appealed from.
Inasmuch as the items in the order were repaired in July 1992 after
the order was issued, and were so acknowledged by the tenant, the
Commissioner restores the rent effective July 1992.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA