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 410510-RO
                                         :  
                                            DRO DOCKET NO.: TC 077813-G
       LINCOLN PLAZA
       ASSOCIATES          PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             

           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

     On October 14, 1986, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition for 
     administrative review of an order issued on September  12,  1986,  by  the
     Rent   Administrator  concerning  the  housing  accommodation   known   as
     Apartment 20C, 20 West 64th Street, New York, New York.  The Administrator 
     directed the owner to roll back the rent  and  to  refund  overcharges  of
     $7274.79 including excess security and interest on  overcharges  collected
     on or after April 1, 1984.

     The Commissioner has reviewed this record and  carefully  considered  that
     portion relevant to the issues raised by this appeal.

     The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was initiated prior  to  April
     1, 1984.  Sections 2526.1 (a) and 2521.1 (d)  of  the  Rent  Stabilization
     Code (effective May 1, 1987) governing rent  overcharge  and  fair  market
     tent 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, any reference in this order and opinion to Section of 
     the Rent Stabilization Code is to the Code in effect on  April  30,  1987,
     and this proceeding is being determined in accordance therewith.

     The tenant (Koren K. Jones) commenced this proceeding on October 26,  1983
     by filing an overcharge complaint in which she indicated  that  she  moved
     into the subject apartment on October 1, 1979 pursuant to a two year lease 
     at a rental of $750.00 per month.  She said she had requested  a  copy  of
     the prior tenant's lease to see if she was being overcharged but  had  not
     received same.  She also explained that the lease for her apartment was in 
     the name of Julian Kaplan, her father, but that she has  been  the  tenant
     for the whole term of the leases, that the landlord knew she would be  the
     tenant, and that he has been accepting her checks.

     The complaint was served on the owner on November 30, 1983.  The owner did 
     not respond at that time.

     As a result of a Notice of Pending Default sent on  March  11,  1986,  the
     owner submitted a statement that the tenant for this apartment  is  Julian
     Kaplan.  The owner enclosed a copy of the original lease  dated  September
     15, 1979, the last renewal dated August 30, 1982, and a lease cancellation 
     agreement dated September 10, 1984.








          DOCKET NUMBER: AJ 410510-RO
     In a subsequent letter dated  July  31,  1986,  the  owner  submitted  the
     certificate of occupancy for the building  and  again  asserted  that  the
     complainant is not the tenant.

     In the  absence  of  a  complete  rent  history  for  the  apartment,  the
     Administrator used  established  default  procedures  in  determining  the
     lawful rent and calculating the overcharges.  The  rent  was  computed  by
     using the tenant's vacancy rent minus a guideline  and  vacancy  allowance
     and  overcharges  were  computed  up  through  September  30,  1984.   The
     Administrator also advised the  owner  that  since  the  agency's  records
     reveal that the  rents  and  services  for  the  building  have  not  been
     registered the owner may not  increase  the  established  rent  until  the
     registration requirements are met.

     In the petition for administrative  review,  the  owner  asserts  that  it
     adequately established that the complainant was not the tenant  of  record
     when it submitted the lease, lease renewal and  lease  cancellation  form,
     all indicating Julian Kaplan as the tenant.   The  owner  added  that  Mr.
     Kaplan purchased the apartment in March 1985.

     The tenant did not answer the petition.

     After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the Commissioner is 
     of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

     A review of the record  reveals  that  there  is  sufficient  evidence  to
     establish that the complainant  was  a  lawful  occupant  of  the  subject
     apartment during the period of time that overcharges  were  found  by  the
     Administrator.  The complaint specifically stated that the leases were  in
     the name  of  the  complainant's  father  so  the  owner's  submission  of
     documents bearing the father's name does not contradict  the  complainants
     own statements and does not establish that the complainant did not  occupy
     the apartment and pay the rent.  The first  renewal  lease  is  signed  by
     Julia Kaplan as "tenant" and by Koren Jones as "witness".   Moreover,  the
     Division's current records reveal that  the  1984  apartment  registration
     filed by the owner names the tenants as "Kaplan/Jones".

     Based on the foregoing  the  Commissioner  finds  that  the  Administrator
     properly  found  the  owner  in  default  and  established  the  rent  and
     overcharges accordingly.  The owner's attempted submission of rent records 
     with  the  petition  is  not  accepted  since  the  scope  of  review   in
     administrative  appeals  is  limited  to  facts  or  evidence  before  the
     Administrator unless it is established  that  certain  facts  or  evidence
     could not reasonably have been submitted prior  to  the  issuance  of  the
     order being appealed.  The owner herein had ample  opportunity  to  submit
     the leases it included with the petition and its reliance on  the  dubious
     position that the complainant  was  not  the  tenant  of  record  when  it
     registered that  person  as  the  tenant  is  not  sufficient  to  warrant
     consideration of the leases for the first time on appeal.

     The owner was requested on two separate ocassions  to  submit  a  complete
     rental history.  The owner 's timely response to these requests would  not
     have precluded the owner from raising the issue of the complainant's








          DOCKET NUMBER: AJ 410510-RO
     standing to file a complaint.  Given the thousands of proceedings awaiting 
     decision by DHCR, it is unreasonable to require DHCR to make  intermediate
     decisions on individual issues.

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

     ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  denied  and  the
     Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

     ISSUED:











                                                                   
                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                          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