AI 410100 RO; AI 410291 RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK   11433

          APPEAL OF                             DOCKET NOS.: AI 410100 RO; 
                                                             AI 410291 RO
                125 EAST 31 STREET REALTY,
                                                DRO DOCKET NO.: 2251 
                                                EXAMINING UNIT
                                                TENANT:  BRENDA MAMBER

                                       IN PART
                              MODIFYING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER

          On December 17, 1986, the above-named petitioner-owner timely
          re-filed a Petition for Administrative Review against an order 
          issued on April 30, 1986 by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus 
          Circle, New York, New York, concerning a housing accommodations 
          misnamed in the order as 233 West 83rd Street Apartment 7E, New 
          York, New York (the then-current address of the tenant) wherein the 
          Administrator determined that the tenant had been overcharged.  The 
          Commissioner notes that the appeal inadvertently received two 
          docket numbers which are herein consolidated.  Further it is noted 
          that the original rejected petition filed on September 19, 1986 is 
          considered timely because the order being appealed incorrectly 
          stated the owner's name and the address of the subject premises and 
          the owner alleged that DHCR never served it with a copy of the 

          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 commenced when the tenant filed an objection to 
          the registration of apartment 4F, 121 East 31 Street, New York, New 
          York.  The tenant alleged that the owner had incorrectly registered 
          the subject apartment as exempt.  Subsequently, the tenant also 
          questioned the amount of rent being charged.

          In answer, the owner asserted that the tenant was not occupying the 
          unit as her primary residence and therefore, the unit should be 

          AI 410100 RO; AI 410291 RO

          exempt from the Rent Stabilization Law.

          On December 13, 1985, the owner was requested to substantiate the 
          April 1, 1980 rent by submitting a copy of the lease in effect on 
          April 1, 1980 and all leases subsequent thereto.  The request was 
          not sent to the owner's attorney of record.

          The owner responded but, the owner's submission was received by the 
          Division after the order herein appealed was issued.

          In said order, the Administrator used procedures that are 
          customarily employed to establish the April 1, 1980 rent when an 
          owner has not substantiated it and based thereon determined that 
          the tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $2,520.22 
          inclusive of excess security.

          In the appeal, the owner contends that the Administrator's order 
          should be reversed because:

               1)   the order was never served on the owner and, 
                    in fact, names the owner's attorneys as 

               2)   the Administrator erroneously defaulted the 
                    owner even though the owner had submitted all 
                    required leases; and

               3)   the Administrator had erroneously determined 
                    that the apartment was subject to the Rent 
                    Stabilization Law although the tenant had 
                    ceased to maintain the premises as her primary 
                    residence and had subleased the premises while 
                    residing elsewhere.

          With its appeal, the owner resubmits the leases previously 

          The tenant contends that the order should be affirmed.

          The Commissioner notes that the order here under review misstates 
          the owner's name and the subject premises.  At the outset, the 
          Commissioner corrects these defects, amending the owner's name to 
          read 125 E. 31 Street Realty and amending the stated subject 
          premises to read 121 E. 31 Street Apartment 4F, New York, New York.  
          The Commissioner notes also that the address to which the order was 
          sent was incorrect.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that there was no violation of 
          the owner's due process rights in this case.   The alleged failure 
          of the Administrator to serve the order on the owner resulted in no 
          prejudice to the owner.  As evidenced by the owner's thorough 

          AI 410100 RO; AI 410291 RO

          petition for administrative review, the owner exercised its 
          complete opportunity to be heard.

          To ensure no violation of due process, all of the submissions have 
          been fully considered by the Commissioner, including the lease 
          history substantiating the April 1, 1980 rent.  

          The Commissioner accepts the lease history for consideration in 
          this appeal.  As examination of the leases discloses that the April 
          1, 1980 base rent was $465.00 and that all rent increases since 
          April 1, 1980 conformed to applicable guidelines orders and that no 
          overcharge occurred.  Accordingly, the Commissioner reverses that 
          part of the order that found an overcharge and directed a refund.

          The applicability of the Rent Stabilization Law to various housing 
          accommodations is governed by Section 2520.11 of the Rent 
          Stabilization Code.  The Commissioner finds that the Administrator 
          correctly determined pursuant to Code Section 2520.11 that the 
          subject apartment is not exempt and correctly directed the owner to 
          a Court of competent jurisdiction on the issue of the tenant's 
          primary residence.

          If the owner has already complied with the Rent Administrator's 
          order and there are arrears due the owner as a result of the 
          instant determination, said arrears shall be payable immediately.
          The tenant is no longer in occupancy at the subject apartment and 
          a copy of the order is being sent to the current occupant of the 
          subject apartment.

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

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted in 
          part, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, modified in accordance with this order and opinion.


                                                  JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                  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