AJ 110471 RO
                                   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.: AJ 110471 RO

                      JOSEPH NADOFF,
                                                DRO DOCKET NO.: Q 3120898 R
                                                                (CDR 22,493)

                                                 TENANT: JANET MARKS          
                                  PETITIONER    
          ------------------------------------X                             



            ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          IN PART


          On October 20, 1986, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on     
          September 17, 1986, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus 
          Circle, New York New York, concerning the housing accommodations 
          known as 81-05 35th Avenue, New York, Apartment No. 4M, wherein 
          the Rent Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged 
          the tenant.

          The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the 
          provisions of Section 2526.1 of the Rent Stabilization Code.

          The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator's order was 
          warranted.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record 
          and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant 
          to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.  

          This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing on March 
          29, 1984 of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant.

          In answer to the complaint, the owner submitted a complete rental 
          history.

          In Order Number CDR 22,493, the Rent Administrator established 
          the lawful stabilization rent as $289.04 effective April 1, 1985,  
          determined that the tenant had been overcharged and directed a 
          refund to the tenant of $6,712.94 including interest on that 
          portion of the overcharge collected on and after April 1, 1984.
          In this petition, the owner alleges in substance that he was not 
          aware of any rent overcharges; that the Administrator failed to 
          credit the owner with the MCI increase granted in Order Number 
          ZQS 000251 OM; and that since he purchased the subject building 







          AJ 110471 RO

          on September 1, 1981, he should be only responsible for the 
          overcharge from that date.  The former owner was Muray Fireston.

          In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in 
          substance that she felt the owner was aware of the overcharges.

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

          An examination of the records in this case discloses that the 
          Administrator failed to credit the owner with the MCI increase 
          granted in Order No. ZQSI 000251 OM.  However, the MCI increase 
          is only effective September 1, 1986 and the Administrator only 
          calculated rents through August 31, 1986.  Accordingly, the 
          Administrator correctly did not mention the MCI increase in his 
          Order.

          With regard to the owner's contention that he was not aware of 
          the overcharges the record reveals that the owner was aware or 
          should have been aware of the overcharges as the owner had a 
          complete rental history for the subject apartment.

          Section 2526.1(f) of the Rent Stabilization Code provides in 
          pertinent part that for overcharges collected prior to April 1, 
          1984, an owner will be held responsible only for his or her 
          portion of the overcharge, in the absence of collusion or any 
          relationship between such owner and any prior owners, and that 
          for overcharge complaints filed or overcharges collected on or 
          after April 1, 1984, a current owner shall be responsible for all 
          overcharge penalties, including penalties collected by any prior 
          owner.

          In the instant case, an examination of the records discloses 
          that there is no evidence of collusion or any relationship 
          between the present owner and any prior owner.  Pursuant to 
          Section 2526.1 (f), the prior owner Muray Fireston is 
          individually responsible for overcharges collected from March 15, 
          1981 until August 31, 1981 in the amount of $330.12 and the 
          current owner is liable for overcharges collected between 
          September 1, 1981 until August 31, 1986 in the amount of 
          $6,382.82.

          The Commissioner notes that the prior owner was not served with a 
          copy of the tenant's complaint nor listed in the Rent 
          Administrator's order.  This order is issued without prejudice to 
          the tenant's rights, if any, to proceed against the prior owner 
          in a court of competent jurisdiction.

          Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through     
          August 31, 1986, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent 
          rents to an amount no greater than that determined by this order 
          plus any lawful increases including the above mentioned MCI 
          increase, and to register any adjusted rents with this order and 
          opinion being given as the explanation for the adjustment.

          Regarding the overcharge attributable to the current owner, this 
          order may, upon the expiration of the period in which the owner 
          may institute a proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil 


          AJ 110471 RO

          Practice Law and Rules, be filed and enforced in the same manner 
          as a judgment or not in excess of twenty percent per month 
          thereof may be offset against any rent thereafter due the owner.

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






          AJ 110471 RO

          ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and the 


          AJ 110471 RO

          same hereby is, granted in part, and, that the order of the Rent 





          AJ 110471 RO

          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, modified in accordance 


          AJ 110471 RO

          with this order and opinion. 





          AJ 110471 RO




          AJ 110471 RO







          AJ 110471 RO




          AJ 110471 RO

          ISSUED





          AJ 110471 RO




          AJ 110471 RO

                                                                      





          AJ 110471 RO

                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA


          AJ 110471 RO

                                          Deputy Commissioner





          AJ 110471 RO




          AJ 110471 RO





    

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