DOCKET NUMBER: AJ-410364-RT
                                  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 NUMBER: AJ-410364-RT
                                               :                 
                  DANIELA NOE,                 :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
                                               :  DOCKET NUMBER:  L-3115178-R
                                               :                  CDR 22,005
                                   PETITIONER  :  
          -------------------------------------X


                  ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING ON APPEAL

          On October 6, 1986, the  above-named  petitioner-tenant  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against  an  order  issued  on
          September 8, 1986 by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle,
          New York, New York concerning the housing accommodations known as 
          Apartment 3-N, 283 Mott Street, New York, New York,  wherein  the
          District   Rent  Administrator  determined  that  the  owner  had
          overcharged the tenant.

          The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was  initiated  prior
          to April 1, 1984.  Section 2526.1(a)(4) and 2521.1(d) of the Rent 
          Stabilization  Code  (effective  May  1,  1987)  governing   rent
          overcharge  and  fair  market  rent  proceedings   provide   that
          determination of these matters be based  upon  the  law  or  code
          provisions in  effect  on  March  31,  1984.   Therefore,  unless
          otherwise  indicated,  reference  to   sections   of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Code (Code) contained herein are  to  the  Code  in
          effect on April 30, 1987.

          The  issue  in  this  appeal  is  whether   the   District   Rent
          Administrator's order was warranted.

          The applicable sections of the law are Sections 25 and 26 of  the
          former Rent Stabilization Code and Section 2522.3 of the  current
          Rent Stabilization Code.

          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 on March 23, 1984 by  the  tenant's
          filing of a rent overcharge complaint  and  a  fair  market  rent
          appeal with the New York  City  Conciliation  and  Appeals  Board
          (CAB), the  agency  formerly  charged  with  enforcing  the  Rent
          Stabilization Law.

          On October 9, 1984, the owner was  served  with  a  copy  of  the
          tenant's overcharge complaint and was requested  to  submit  rent
          records to prove the lawfulness of the rent being charged.






          DOCKET NUMBER: AJ-410364-RT

          In its answer to the tenant's  overcharge  complaint,  the  owner
          submitted a complete rental history for the subject apartment.

          In  Order  Number  CDR  22,005  issued  September  8,  1986,  the
          District Rent Administrator determined that the tenant  had  been
          overcharged since June 1, 1983 and accordingly directed the owner 
          to refund to the tenant $461.24 which  included  excess  security
          and interest on that portion of the overcharge  occurring  on  or
          after April 1, 1984.

          In this petition, the  tenant  contends  in  substance  that  the
          District Rent Administrator's order is incorrect  and  should  be
          modified because the Administrator ignored her fair  market  rent
          appeal.

          In response, the owner contends  in  substance  that  the  tenant
          should not be allowed to convert her overcharge complaint into  a
          fair  market  rent  appeal  after  a  decision  on  the  original
          overcharge  complaint  has  been  rendered.   The  owner  further
          contends that the tenant's fair market rent  appeal  is,  in  any
          event, time-barred because the tenant was served  with  the  DC-2
          Notice, but failed to file a fair market rent  appeal  within  90
          days  of service  of  the  DC-2  Notice.   In  support  of  these
          contentions, the owner submits copies of  certified  mail  return
          receipts dated March 1982.

          In rebuttal, the tenant contends in substance that she was  never
          served with a DC-2 Notice and that she did  file  a  fair  market
          rent appeal along with her overcharge compliant in Mach of 1984.

          In surrebuttal, the owner contends in substance that the tenant's 
          allegations are either false or incompetent.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding  must  be
          remanded  to  the  District  Rent   Administrator   for   further
          consideration.




          A review of the record in the instant  case  indicates  that  the
          tenant did file a fair market rent appeal in March of  1984,  but
          that the Administrator failed to process the tenant's appeal.  
          Accordingly,  this  proceeding  must  be  remanded  to  determine
          whether the tenant was entitled to challenge  the  initial  legal
          regulated rent pursuant to Sections 25 and 26 of the former  Rent
          Stabilization Code, and if so, to determine whether  the  initial
          legal regulated rent  exceeded  the  fair  market  rent  for  the
          apartment.  All parties are to be notified and given a chance  to
          submit evidence in such remanded proceeding including evidence as 
          to whether the tenant was served with the DC-2  Notice.   If  the
          tenant was served with the DC-2 Notice, then  the  tenant's  fair
          market rent appeal must  be  dismissed  and  the  Administrator's
          order affirmed unless the tenant's fair market  rent  appeal  was
          filed within ninety days  after  the  tenant  received  the  DC-2
          Notice.








          DOCKET NUMBER: AJ-410364-RT
          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is granted to 
          the extent of remanding this  proceeding  to  the  district  Rent
          Administrator for further  processing  in  accordance  with  this
          order and opinion.  The automatic stay of so much of the District 
          Rent  Administrator's  order  as  directed  a  refund  is  hereby
          continued until a new order is issued upon remand.  However,  the
          Administrator's determination as to the rent is  not  stayed  and
          shall remain in effect, except for  any  adjustment  pursuant  to
          lease renewals, until the Administrator issues a new  Order  upon
          remand.


          ISSUED:



                                                                          
                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                             Deputy Commissioner
           







                                               ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BUREAU
                                                COVERING MEMORANDUM


          ARB Docket No.:  AJ-410364-RT

          DRO Docket No/Order No.:  L-3115178-R/CDR 22,005

          Tenant(s): DANIELA NOE

          Owner:  NORMANDY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

          Code Section:  25 AND 26 OF THE FORMER RSC; 2522.3 OF CURRENT RSC

          Premises:  283 MOTT STREET, APARTMENT 3-N, NEW YORK, NY


          ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          Administrator ailed to consider  the  tenant's  Fair  Market  Rent
          Appeal.  Thus, matter remanded.




          APPROVED:

          Processing Attorney:                                             

          Supervising Attorney:                                            

          Bureau Chief:                                                    

          Deputy Counsel:                                                  

          Deputy Commissioner:                                             


          Mailed copies of Order and Determination to:
                         Tenant(s)            
                         Owner                
                         Tenant's Atty.       
                         Owner's Atty.        


          Date:                    : by                                   
                                        Signature

    

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