ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA610072RO

                                  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.:              
                                                 GA610072RO
                                              :  
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET NO.: 
                                                 EG610202S
                                                 
           CENTRAL PROPERTIES TRUST              
           C/O NORWAX ASSOCIATES, INC.,

                                                                             
                                      
                                             
                                                  

                              PETITIONER      : 
          ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On January 13, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on November 
          21, 1991, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 2979 Marion Avenue, Bronx, N. Y., Apartment 
          4-A, wherein the Administrator determined that a diminution of 
          service had occurred and reduced the rent to the level in effect 
          prior to the last rent guideline increase which commenced before 
          the effective date of the order.  Based on an inspection held on 
          October 10, 1992, the rent was reduced because of the following 
          service deficiencies:

                    (1) lack of vermin control
                    (2) defective floor covering bathroom
                    (3) defective medicine cabinet
                    (4) defective bathroom walls
                    (5) defective bathroom towel rack
                    (6) leaks and stains in foyer closet
                    (7) missing shades and blinds
                    (8) defective paint and plaster apartment-wide
















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA610072RO

               The same inspection showed that a number of other complained- 
          of services were being maintained by the owner at the time of the 
          inspection.

               The DHCR dismissed petitioner's first PAR, on February 18, 
          1992, on the ground that the petition was not filed within thirty- 
          five (35) days after the issuance of the Rent Administrator's 
          order.

               Subsequent thereto, the owner filed a petition in the Supreme 
          Court, pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, 
          requesting that the Court direct the division to issue a new 
          determination of the owner's administrative appeal.    

               In support of its application to reverse the decision on 
          appeal, the owner annexed a copy of the certified mail receipt, 
          which was stamped by the United States Postal Service on 
          December 26, 1991.

               Consequently, the DHCR stipulated and agreed to deem the PAR 
          timely filed and to issue a new order and the Court remanded the 
          proceedings back to the DHCR for a determination within 90 days.  

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.  

               The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly 
          reduced the rent of the subject apartment.

               On appeal, the petitioner asserted, among other things, that 
          the Rent Administrator's order lacked specificity and failed to set 
          forth the facts and findings upon which the order was based and 
          that it is improper for the DHCR to grant a rent reduction for some 
          services which were not required services on the base date. 

               After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record 
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

               Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code,









                    "A tenant may apply to the DHCR for a reduc-
                    tion of the legal regulated rent to the level






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA610072RO

                    in effect prior to the most recent guidelines
                    adjustment, and the DHCR shall so reduce the
                    rent for the period for which it is found 
                    that the owner has failed to maintain re-
                    quired services."

               Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include 
          repairs and maintenance.

               The record demonstrates that a Notice and Transmittal of 
          Tenant's Complaint was mailed to the owner on July 18, 1990 at the 
          owner's correct address but that the owner failed to submit an 
          answer below.

               The owner retained an attorney and the representative filed a 
          Notice of Appearance in the proceeding, on August 6, 1990, and 
          requested a number of one month extensions to answer the tenant's
          complaint from August 6, 1990 (the date of the appearance) to March 
          15, 1991, which were granted by the division.

               The record before the Rent Administrator, however, is devoid 
          of any answer submitted on behalf of the owner. 

               The owner had sixteen months from the date of service of the 
          tenant's complaint until the issuance of the Administrator's order 
          to investigate the tenant's complaint and to make the necessary  
          repairs, but failed to do so.

               Since the scope of administrative review is limited to the 
          facts or evidence which were raised before the Rent Administrator, 
          the matters raised by the owner in the petition may not now be 
          considered for the first time on administrative appeal. 

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator 
          properly based his determination on the entire record, including 
          the results of the on-site inspection conducted in the subject 
          apartment.

               This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the 
          owner's right to file the appropriate application with the Division 
          for restoration of rent based upon a restoration of services, if 
          the facts so warrant.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is



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













          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA610072RO

          ISSUED:


                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Deputy Commissioner




                                                    

    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name