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 REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:EL210321RO
3060 Ocean Ave. Apartments Corp. DOCKET NO.: DF210290S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on December 12, 1990,
concerning the housing accommodations know as 3060 Ocean Avenue,
Brooklyn, New York, Apt.3H, wherein the Rent Administrator
determined that certain conditions found its subject apartment
constituted a services decrease.
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 petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding by filing a complaint
asserting that the owner had failed to maintain services in the
subject apartment, in that the owner had not supplied screens for
the new replacement windows, although screens had been provided for
the windows that were removed.
In an answer, the owner asserted, in substance, that while the
owner did install new windows, the owner had no knowledge of the
screens removed, that screens were not removed by the owner, that
the owner had not provided screens in the past, and that they were
not the owner's responsibility.
An inspection of the subject premises was conducted on August
1, 1990 by DHCR inspector who confirmed that there were no window
screens at the time of inspection.
The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services,
and further, ordered a reduction of the stabilization rent.
In its petition for administrative review, the owner
reiterates the assertions made below. A copy of the petition was
served on the tenant. In response to the owner's claim that he had
no prior knowledge of the screens, the tenant submitted a copy of
a September 1984 notice by the managing agent indicating the
presence of screens on the subject apartment. In a June 27,1991,
reply thereto,the owner concedes that screens are a service
provided by the owner, and notes that new screens have been
provided to the tenant. However, the owner still requests that the
rent reduction be revoked,on the grounds that the tenant had not
previously provided this proof.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the
opinion that the petition should be denied.
Section 2520.6(r) of the Rent Stabilization Code defines
required services as those services furnished or required to be
furnished on the base date and all additional services provided or
required to be provided thereafter. For purposes of individual
apartment services the applicable base date is May 29, 1974.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code,
DHCR is required to order a rent reduction, upon application by a
tenant, where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain
required services. The owner's petition does not establish any
basis for modifying or revoking the Administrator's order, which
determined that the owner was not maintaining required services
based on a physical inspection confirming the existence of
defective conditions in the subject apartment for which a rent
reduction is warranted.
The owner, who is in the best position to maintain and to
present adequate records to establish the services provided on the
base date, failed to do so. Upon presentation by the tenant of
such evidence on appeal, the owner concedes that screens are a
service the owner is required to provide, and that the service has
been restored as of June 21, 1991.
DHCR records also reveal that on September 3, 1991, the
Administration issued an order that granted the owner's rent
restoration application per Docket no. FA210052OR.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that
resulted by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of
this order and opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA