GH 410128 RT
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.: GH 410128 RT
THOMAS HOOBLER RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: EF 430044 B
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
REVOKING ORDER AND REMANDING PROCEEDING TO RENT ADMINISTRATOR
On August 6, 1992 the above named petitioner-tenant filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued July 27, 1992. The order concerned various
housing accommodations located at 320 West 83rd Street, New York,
N.Y. The Administrator denied the tenants' application for a
building-wide rent reduction.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
appeal.
The tenants commenced this proceeding on June 5, 1990 when 18
tenants of the 50 who live in the subject building filed a
Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide Services
wherein they alleged that the owner was denying access to the
basement storage area after 10 PM. The tenants stated that they
required access to the laundry facilities, garbage disposal and
circuit breakers. They further alleged that they had been
permitted 24 hour access to the area before the building was
converted to cooperative ownership.
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded
an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on July 2,
1990 and stated that the basement door had been locked for security
reasons, that the tenants had never been afforded 24 hour
unrestricted access to the basement and that the tenants are not
entitled, either by lease or provision of the Rent Stabilization
Code, to such unrestricted access.
The tenants filed a reply on March 30, 1992 and stated that
the locking of the basement did not solve the security problem,
that prior to the cooperative conversion they had been allowed 24
GH 410128 RT
hour access, that they needed access to the circuit breakers in the
basement and that they were entitled to such access by virtue of
the service having been previously afforded. This reply was served
on the owner and an opportunity to comment was afforded.
The owner filed a further reply on May 7, 1992. The owner
stated that the basement area was locked only from 11 PM to 7 AM,
that the remainder of the building had been secured against
intruders, that the building superintendent had access to the
circuit breakers if necessary, and the leases did not contain any
provisions granting the tenants unrestricted basement access nor
was this listed as a required service in the 1984 registration
statement.
The Administrator issued the order here under review on July
27, 1992. The Administrator found that the tenants had not
presented facts sufficient to warrant a rent reduction.
Accordingly, the Administrator denied the complaint and terminated
the proceeding without prejudice to the tenants right to refile if
other facts can be shown that would warrant such relief.
On appeal the tenants state that the Administrator failed to
consider their March 30, 1992 reply to the owner's response wherein
the tenants stated that they had been afforded 24 hour access to
the basement prior to the cooperative conversion and that the
owner's statements to the contrary were false.
The owner filed a response on September 2, 1992 wherein it
stated that it had made no false statements regarding this matter
and that the Administrator was correct in denying the complaint.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted,
the order here under review should be revoked and the proceeding
remanded to the Administrator for further investigation.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record on appeal and has
determined that the Administrator did not sufficiently investigate
this matter before issuing the order here under review. The
Commissioner finds that the submissions of the tenants were
sufficient to warrant such further investigation especially in
light of the admission of the owner that a lock had been installed
on the door to the basement where one did not exist before. The
Commissioner is therefore of the opinion that the Administrator
incorrectly issued the order here under review. That order is
revoked. The proceeding is remanded for further investigation
including the holding of a hearing if the Administrator determines
the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it
is
GH 410128 RT
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
granted, that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, revoked and that this proceeding be, and the same hereby
is, remanded for further investigation consistent with this order
and opinion.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|