GB 210024 RT; GC 210170 RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NO.: 
                                                  GB 210024 RT
                                                  GC 210170 RO

               JOSEFA FALLS                       DISTRICT RENT
               HARRY LIEBSHARD                    ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: FA 210791 S

               The Commissioner has consolidated the above referenced 
          administrative appeals as both contain common issues of law or 

               The above named petitioner-owner and petitioner-tenant filed 
          timely Petitions for Administrative Review against an order of the 
          Rent Administrator issued December 30, 1991. The order concerned 
          housing accommodations known as Apt. 2R located at 246 Prospect 
          Park West, Brooklyn, N.Y.  The Administrator ordered a rent 
          reduction for failure to maintain required services.  

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by these 

               The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a Statement of 
          Complaint of Decrease in Services in January, 1991 wherein the 
          tenant alleged, inter alia, the following services deficiencies:

                    1.   Bathroom ceiling falling,

                    2.   Bathroom floor in bad condition,

                    3.   Toilet falling into the floor,

                    4.   Defective electrical wiring and lights throughout 

                    5.   Defective windows,

                    4.   Building entrance door has no locks,

          GB 210024 RT; GC 210170 RO

                    5.   Roach and mouse infestation.

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on August 7, 
          1991 and denied each allegation contained in the complaint.
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on December 2, 1991 and 
          revealed the following:

                    1.   Bathroom ceiling totally collapsed,

                    2.   Bathroom floor defective,

                    3.   Light fixture and switch in kitchen connected with 
                         exposed wiring; light fixture on living room 
                         ceiling is hanging on exposed wire; fixture and 
                         switch in living room connected with exposed 
                         wiring; light fixtures in the two bedrooms are 
                         hanging from exposed wiring,

                    4.   Two windows in bedroom have loose sashes and are 
                         drafty; kitchen window top sash falling and  bottom 
                         sash has broken glass; both sashes loose and 
                         drafty; bathroom window top sash has broken glass 
                         and top and lower sashes are loose and drafty; 
                         living room cannot be opened and has defective lock 
                         and loose drafty lower sash,

                    5.   Evidence of roach and mice infestation.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on 
          December 30, 1991 and ordered a rent reduction equal to the most 
          recent guideline adjustment effective August 1, 1991. 

               Both parties have filed appeals from the order here under 
          review.  The tenant states that the owner has repaired the bathroom 
          ceiling but all other defects reported by the inspector have still 
          not been repaired.  The owner filed a response to the tenant's 
          petition on June 19, 1992 and stated that he had made repairs, that 
          the tenant was harassing him and obstructing his efforts, and that 
          he has exterminated the public areas.
               The owner's petition states that all repairs have been made 
          and that services have been maintained despite the report of the 
          inspector.  The owner accuses the tenant of causing the problems in 
          the apartment by unauthorized installations and states that the 
          tenant's lease requires the tenant to make repairs at the tenant's 
          own expense.  The tenant filed a response on April 28, 1992 and 
          reiterated her claim that the owner had only repaired the ceiling 
          and painted the bathroom walls.

          GB 210024 RT; GC 210170 RO

               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petitions should be denied.

               With regard to the tenant's petition, the Commissioner finds 
          that the tenant has not stated any error committed by the 
          Administrator in issuing the order here under review.  Although the 
          tenant states that the bathroom ceiling has been repaired, she does 
          not state whether the repair was done before or after issuance of 
          the order here under review.  Since the tenant has stated no 
          grounds for overturning or modifying the Administrator's order, 
          this petition is denied.

               The owner's petition attempts to attack the report of the DHCR 
          inspector.  Said report found numerous services deficiencies.  The 
          owner offers no evidence to rebut the report, other than the 
          assertion that services have continued to be maintained.  Numerous 
          prior orders of the Commissioner have stated that the report of a 
          DHCR inspector is entitled to more probative weight than the 
          unsupported allegations of a party to the proceeding.

               Pursuant to 9 NYCRR 2523.4 (a), a tenant may apply to the DHCR 
          for a rent reduction and the rent shall be reduced upon a finding 
          that the owner has failed to maintain required services.  Repairs 
          and maintenance are included in the definition of required services 
          pursuant to 9 NYCRR 2520.6 (r).  The Commissioner finds that the 
          Administrator properly based this determination on the entire 
          record, including the results of the on-site physical inspection 
          conducted on December 2, 1991.  Since the owner has put forth no 
          grounds upon which to overturn or modify that order, the owner's 
          petition is denied.  The order here under review is affirmed.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it 

               ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, 
          denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, affirmed.


                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             Acting 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