STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          -----------------------------------X 
          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
                                                           South West
                                                           Apt. 5D
                                                           Brooklyn, NY      
          -----------------------------------X                           
            
             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 
          was defective.
                                          1












          GG210110RO

          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 
          services.

          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, 
          it is

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

          ISSUED:
                                                                    
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Deputy Commissioner
                                           
                                          2