IN RE: Application of Isidore B. SIMKOWITZ (1998)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered March 21, 1997, which denied petitioners' application pursuant to CPLR article 78 and dismissed the petition seeking annulment of an order of the Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (“DHCR”), dated May 24, 1996, affirming a rent reduction order of the District Rent Administrator of DHCR dated August 11, 1994, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 DHCR's determination reducing the rent of complainant, a tenant of rent-stabilized premises, by reason of petitioner landlords' failure to provide required services had a rational basis and was not arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Dupont Assocs. v. State Div. of Housing & Community Renewal, 179 A.D.2d 359, 578 N.Y.S.2d 834, lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 760, 591 N.Y.S.2d 137, 605 N.E.2d 873).   The tenant's complaint that the refrigerator in her apartment was not working properly, froze food, and leaked, was confirmed by an an impartial on-site inspection conducted by DHCR, which disclosed abnormal freezer and refrigerator temperatures, and improperly installed refrigerator gaskets (see, Howard-Carol Tenants' Assn. v. Conciliation and Appeals Board, 64 A.D.2d 546, 406 N.Y.S.2d 845, affd. 48 N.Y.2d 768, 423 N.Y.S.2d 911, 399 N.E.2d 942).

 Petitioners' remaining claims either were not raised before the Rent Administrator or were raised for the first time in this proceeding and, accordingly, were not properly before the IAS court (Matter of Charles Birdoff & Co. v. State Div. of Housing & Community Renewal, 204 A.D.2d 630, 612 N.Y.S.2d 418;  Matter of Fanelli v. New York City Conciliation and Appeals Board, 90 A.D.2d 756, 757, 455 N.Y.S.2d 814, affd. 58 N.Y.2d 952, 460 N.Y.S.2d 534, 447 N.E.2d 82).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.