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.: CG 130027-RO
                                         :  
                                            DRO DOCKET NO.: BH 110168-B
       CENTRAL QUEENS PROPERTY
       ASSOCIATES          PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             

           ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
             IN PART AND MODIFYING DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER

     On July 1, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner  filed  a  Petition  for
     Administrative Review against an order issued on  May  27,  1988,  by  the
     District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,  New  York,
     concerning various apartments at  55-30  98th  Place,  Corona,  New  York,
     wherein the District Rent Administrator directed a rent reduction based on 
     a finding of a decrease in 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.

     This proceeding was  originally  commenced  on  August  14,  1987  by  the
     filing of a complaint of decreased services by the tenants alleging, among 
     other things, that the roof doors do not close properly and are not  self-
     locking, that the elevators  run  spordically  and  indicator  lights  are
     missing, that the playgrounds had been dismantled, and  that  the  garages
     flood and the garage heating systems had been decreased.

     The tenants requested a rent reduction based upon the alleged decrease  in
     services.

     On November 5, 1987, the DHCR sent  the  owner  a  copy  of  the  tenant's
     complaint.

     In answer to the complaint, the owner  stated  that  services  were  being
     maintained and that there were no playground areas. 

     By subsequent correspondence dated December 28, 1987 and  April  28,  1988
     the owner stated that this complaint was one of seven identical complaints 
     for each of the buildings in the complex.  The owner advised that  it  was
     in the process of renovating and refurbishing the building  complex;  that
     it was remedying each of the alleged conditions; and that it  was  in  the
     process of resolving all of the issues directly  with  the  tenants.   The
     owner submitted letters dated December 17, 1987 and February 23, 1988 from 
     the Vice President of the Tenants' Association acknowledging certain 
     repairs and stating that the owner had agreed to paint the  halls,  walls,
     doors and stairwells.  The owner requested that the DHCR hold the 








          DOCKET NUMBER: CG 130027-RO
     complaints in abeyance while the owner was resolving the issues  with  the
     tenants.  The owner stated that it would submit a supplemental  answer  to
     address unresolved items and to update its  answer  with  respect  to  the
     course of the renovations to the building.

     An inspection was conducted on January 29, 1988 and February 1, 1988 by  a
     staff member of the DHCR which showed the following:


          1.  The roof doors are not self-closing and are unsecured.

          2.  The elevator does not level at each floor and the indicator
              light is inoperative.

          3.  The benches and playground items have been removed.

          4.  Three of the four garage heaters are inoperative.

          5.  Various areas of the garage had water accumulation at the  
              time of inspection.

          6.  The sixth floor is peeling paint and plaster.


     In the order issued on May 27, 1988 the Administrator determined that  the
     owner had failed to maintain services, directed a restoration of  services
     and further directed a  rent  reduction  by  the  most  recent  guidelines
     adjustment effective December 1, 1987.

     In this petition the owner asserts the following: 

          1)  Based on the owner's answer submitted to  the  Administrator,
              the DHCR should have consolidated the complaints for all  the
              buildings in the complex and should have held the  complaints
              in abeyance while the owner was in the process  of  resolving
              the issues in good  faith  directly  with  the  tenants,  and
              that, alternatively, the  owner,  pursuant  to  its  request,
              should  have  been  afforded  an  opportunity  to  submit   a
              supplemental answer.

          2)  The owner was not notified of the inspection, nor has the 
              owner seen a copy of the inspection report.  The owner 
              requests a copy of the inspection report in order to be able
              to respond to its contents.

          3)  The order issued under Docket Number BH 110170-B is  
              inconsistent with the order in this case.

          4)  At all relevant times, all services were being provided or 
              maintained.

          5)  The conditions reported were isolated temporary occurrences
              requiring only minor repairs that do not warrant a rent 
              reduction.








          DOCKET NUMBER: CG 130027-RO
          6)  The penalty of a rent reduction is unwarranted because it 
              bears no reasonable relationship to the conditions reported.

          7)  The Administrator's order is predicated on a single 
              inspection with no showing as to how long the alleged 
              conditions existed and is therefore not supported by 
              sufficient evidence.

          8)  The Administrator improperly reduced the rent for all 
              tenants who signed the complaint even though certain items 
              are not building wide and do not affect all the tenants.  
              Only two of the fourteen complaint tenants rent garage 
              spaces.  Only three of the fourteen tenants have apartments
              on the sixth floor.  Moreover, the finding that the sixth
              floor has peeling paint and is in  need  of  painting  should
              not be included in the order because it  was  not  listed  in
              the tenants'  complaint  and  because  the  sixth  floor  was
              freshly painted and plastered prior to the date  of  issuance
              of the Administrator's order.

          9)  Regarding the specific conditions the owner asserts that the
              roof doors and elevator are in good working order and are 
              properly maintained and any problems were promptly 
              repaired; that the garage heaters do not constitute a 
              required service and that, in any event, the garage is kept
              adequately heated; and that with respect to water
              accumulation in the garage, while the owner asserts that 
              this does not constitute a decrease in services, the owner 
              intends to repair or install a new roof on the garage.  The
              owner also asserts that the due to repeated vandalism over 
              the years, the playground became dismantled, that the owner
              is willing to provide the tenants with substitute facilities
              and that the owner is negotiating with the  tenants  directly
              on this issue.


     The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be granted in 
     part.

     Section 2523.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code, provides that

          A tenant may apply to the DHCR  for  a  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 repaired and 
     maintenance.
     The  Commissioner  finds  that  the  Administrator  was  not  obliged   to
     consolidate the various services complaints for all the buildings  in  the
     complex since the various  complaints  involved  different  buildings  and
     different tenants.

     The Commissioner finds that the Administrator was not  obligated  to  hold
     the tenants complaints in abeyance based on the owner's statements that it






          DOCKET NUMBER: CG 130027-RO
     was in the process of resolving the issues with the tenants; nor  was  the
     Administrator obligated to afford the owner an opportunity to submit a 
     supplemental answer or to notify the owner of the inspection or inspection 
     report.  The owner was notified of the  tenants'  complaint,  afforded  an
     opportunity to respond, and  given  a  reasonable  time  within  which  to
     effectuate repairs.  There is no requirement that the owner be sent a copy 
     of the inspection report and the Commissioner has so  held  in  the  past.
     (Accord: ARL 11199-U).

     The owner's assertions that services were being provided or maintained  at
     all relevant times is disproved by the inspection report which constituted 
     sufficient evidence for the  Administrator's  finding  of  a  decrease  in
     services and directive of a rent  reduction  in  accordance  with  Section
     2523.4(a)  of  the  Code.   Regarding  the  owner's  assertion  that   the
     conditions reported were isolated  temporary  occurrences  requiring  only
     minor repairs not warranting a rent reduction, the Commissioner finds that 
     the conditions reported in this  case  affect  the  security,  safety  and
     comfort of the tenants and constitute a decrease in services, even  though
     some of the conditions may require only minor repairs.  In  addition,  the
     dismantling of the playground certainly cannot be described as an isolated 
     temporary occurrence requiring only minor repairs.

     Regarding the owner's assertion that the garage heaters do not  constitute
     a required service, the Commissioner finds that the owner failed to  raise
     this issue during the proceeding below and may not raise it for the  first
     time  on  administrative  appeal.   The  Commissioner  notes  that  it  is
     undisputed that the garage heaters have been provided by the owner  on  or
     after the base date and therefore the garage heaters constitute a required 
     service.

     Regarding the owner's assertion that only two of  the  fourteen  complaint
     tenants (A.D'Meia, apt, 4K & J. Little, apt 6D) rent  garage  spaces,  the
     Commissioner finds that the Administrator's findings  as  to  the  garage,
     i.e., inoperative heaters and water accumulation, apply only  to  the  two
     affected tenants and those particular findings can serve as a basis for  a
     rent reduction only for those tenants.

     A review of the record in this case confirms the  owner's  assertion  that
     the tenants failed to include a complaint of peeling paint and plaster  on
     the sixth floor in their original complaint.  Therefore  the  Commissioner
     finds that this condition should not have been part of the inspection  and
     should not have been included by the Administrator as a basis for  a  rent
     reduction.  The Administrator's order is hereby modified to eliminate this 
     condition from the list of decreased services.The Commissioner notes  that
     the owner filed two  rent  restoration  applications,  Docket  Numbers  DB
     110112-OR and DJ 1100640-OR, which were denied by orders issued on  August
     14, 1989 and August 22, 1990, respectively.  The owner filed a third  rent
     restoration application with the DHCR, Docket Number EK  110225-OR,  which
     is currently pending.

     THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is











          DOCKET NUMBER: CG 130027-RO
     ORDERED, that this petition be and the same hereby is granted in part  and
     the District  Rent  Administrator's  order  be  and  the  same  hereby  is
     modified to the extent hereinabove indicated.

     ISSUED:















                                                                   
                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                           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