STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.:
John J. Fee,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On July 30, 1992 and August 10, 1992, the above-named petitioner-
tenants filed petitions for administrative review (PAR) of an order
issued on July 30, 1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodations known as 43-09 47th Avenue, Sunnyside, N.Y.,
various apartments, wherein the Administrator determined that a
reduction in rent was not warranted based upon a reduction in
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 the administrative appeals.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly denied
the tenants' application for a reduction in rent.
On September 20, 1991, the tenants filed a building-wide complaint
alleging that the owner failed to maintain services.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on October 22, 1991,
alleging that all building services are being maintained at all
A DHCR inspection conducted on March 13, 1992, revealed that the
owner was, in fact, maintaining all services.
More specifically, the inspector found that the following services
were being maintained:
Lighting in main entry Janitor service vestibule
Paint/plaster lobby Janitor service building-wide
Elevator service Elevator mirror
Elevator doors Rear and side entry doors
Vermin control public area Door lock roof
Signs - superintendent Door lock vestibule
Wiring hall Lighting 2,3,5,6, floors
Lighting vestibule hall
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant of Apartment 6-O asserted, in
pertinent part, that the janitor and superintendent's services
being offered were minimal and that entrance doors throughout the
building were being left open. The petitioner-tenant of Apartment
3-R essentially repeated the allegations above but further asserted
that vermin control was non-existent.
The petition under Docket No. GH120185RT was served on the owner on
September 14, 1992 and on September 21, 1992, the owner filed an
answer to the petition stating that the Rent Administrator's order
of July 30, 1992, supports its contention that all services are
being maintained at all times.
The petition under Docket No. GH120084RT was served on the owner,
on August 26, 1992, and on September 11, 1992, the owner filed an
answer to this petition essentially reiterating the allegations
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeals
should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a
tenant may apply to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
(DHCR) for reduction of the legal regulated rent to the level 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 required services.
Required services are defined in Section 2520.6(r) to include
repairs and maintenance.
Section 2202.16 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations provides that
an owner's failure to maintain services may result in an order of
decrease in maximum rent, in an amount determined by the discretion
of the Rent Administrator.
The record clearly shows that the Rent administrator in denying the
tenants' application for a rent reduction, based his findings on
the results of an inspection, held by the DHCR on March 13, 1992,
which revealed that the owner was providing all required services
specified in the tenants' complaint.
The Commissioner deems it appropriate to rely on the results of the
Division's inspection and finds that the petitioners failed to
adduce convincing evidence that the inspector's findings were
erroneous in any way.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly
based his determination on the entire record, including the results
of the on-site inspection conducted on March 13, 1992, and that the
Rent Administrator properly denied the tenants' application to
reduce the rent upon determining that the owner was maintaining
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York and the Rent Stabilization Law
and Code, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied,
and the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA