GD 210184 RO
                                  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.: GD 210184 RO
                                                  
          PHILIP GALLO                            RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: EC 210686 S
                                  PETITIONER            
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
               On April 13, 1992 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued March 30, 1992. The order concerned housing 
          accommodations located in the basement of 420 Eighth Avenue, 
          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 this 
          appeal.

               The tenant commenced this proceeding on March 16, 1990 by 
          filing a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Services wherein she  
          alleged the following services deficiencies:

                    1.   Rotted and corroded flooring throughout apartment,

                    2.   Defective refrigerator,

                    3.   Exterminator does not visit apartment,

                    4.   Leaking toilet flushometer,

                    5.   Door to apartment in need of repainting.

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner failed to file a response.
           
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on March 20, 1992 and 
          revealed the following:

                    1.   Evidence of roach infestation in kitchen,












          GD 210184 RO


                    2.   Leaking flushometer.

          The following services were found to have been maintained:

                    1.   No evidence of defective floor covering,

                    2.   Refrigerator in good condition,

                    3.   Apartment door not in need of painting or 
                         plastering.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on March 
          30, 1992 and ordered a rent reduction of an amount equal to the 
          most recent guideline adjustment based on the report of the 
          inspector. 

               On appeal the owner states that an exterminator is available 
          for the tenant's use and that the tenant has failed to notify the 
          owner of the problem with the flushometer or to provide access for 
          repairs to be made.  The tenant filed a response on May 2, 1992 and 
          contradicted the statements of the owner.  The owner filed a reply 
          on May 21, 1992 and again stated that extermination services were 
          available for the tenant and that the tenant failed to notify him 
          that the flushometer was in need of repair.

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

               Numerous prior decisions of the Commissioner have stated the 
          well settled administrative law doctrine that the scope of review 
          in an administrative appeal is limited to facts or evidence 
          presented to the Administrator, unless it can be shown that those 
          facts or evidence could not have been presented.  In this 
          proceeding the owner did not respond to the complaint and does not 
          offer any explanation for the failure to do so.  Accordingly, the 
          Commissioner cannot consider the owner's arguments on appeal.

               Pursuant to 9 NYCRR 2523.4 a tenant may apply to the DHCR for 
          a rent reduction and the Administrator is required to reduce the 
          rent upon a finding of failure to maintain required services.  
          Required services include the providing of routine maintenance and 
          repair pursuant to 9 NYCRR 2520.6 (r).  The Commissioner finds that 
          the Administrator based this determination on the entire record 
          including the results of the on-site physical inspection conducted 
          on March 20, 1992.  The order here under review is affirmed.

               The owner may file for rent restoration when services have 
          been fully restored.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it 
          is






          GD 210184 RO

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

          ISSUED:



                                                                             
                                             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