STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: GL430157RO
NIKOLAS ISSARIS, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: FI430146B
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 17, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
November 19, 1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodations known as 91 East Seventh Street, New York,
New York, various apartments, wherein the Administrator determined
that a reduction in rent was warranted based upon a reduction in
The Rent Administrator also directed full restoration of services.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly reduced
the rent of various apartments in the subject premises.
On September 18, 1991, one rent controlled tenant filed a complaint
alleging that there was a diminution in building-wide services.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint, on October 15, 1991,
alleging that all service items specified in the tenant's complaint
have been corrected with the exception of the mail box. As to the
latter, the U.S. Postal Service advised that the door of the
mailbox was in working condition and that replacement was not
A physical inspection of the premises on April 21, 1992 revealed
that the buzzer release mechanism in the entrance door was not
functioning, the entire mailbox housing was loose, there were holes
in the wood stairs between the fifth floor and the roof, and the
four garbage cans were broken. All other conditions complained of
were found to have been corrected.
The owner was advised of the results of the inspection on May 15,
and August 10, 1992 and afforded a final opportunity to attend to
repairs. The owner did not respond.
A second inspection on September 29, 1992, revealed that the owner
had not corrected the following conditions:
1. Floor between 5th floor and roof had rotted wood
2. Buzzer in apartment #5 not functioning.
3. Mail box, apartment #5, bent and loose
4. Garbage cans have broken metal bottoms.
Based on the results of these inspections, the Rent Administrator
ordered a $14.00 per month rent reduction for all rent controlled
tenant's in the building.
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
all necessary repair-work was completed.
The petition was served on the tenants on January 13, 1993 and two
of the tenants filed answers to the petition confirming that the
owner had corrected all service deficiencies.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
For rent controlled tenants, Section 2202.16 of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations provides that a finding that an owner failed
to maintain services may result in an order of decrease in maximum
rent, in an amount determined by the discretion of the Rent
Although the record contains tenant statements that all work was
performed by the owner, it is apparent that the work was performed
after the issuance of the appealed order.
The inspections held on April 21, 1992 and September 29, 1992
demonstrate that the owner was not maintaining services.
A review of the record before the Administrator clearly shows that
the owner did not submit any evidence that the deficiencies noted
on the inspectors' reports were completed in a workmanlike manner
at the time of the DHCR's inspections or at any time prior to the
issuance of the Administrator's order.
The Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly based the
determination on the entire record, including the results of the
on-site physical inspections conducted on April 21, 1992 and
September 29, 1992, and that pursuant to Section 2202.16 of the
Rent and Eviction Regulations the Administrator was authorized to
reduce the rent upon determining that the owner had failed to
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the owner has offered
insufficient reason to disturb the Rent Administrator's
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and Evic-
tion Regulations for New York, it is
ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be, and the same hereby is
denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be and the same
hereby is, affirmed.
A review of DHCR records shows that he owner filed an application
for restoration of the rents under Docket No. HD420132OR, which is
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA