DOC.NO.: AK 110361-RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: AK 110361-RO
BIST MANAGEMENT, : DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONER : DOCKET NO. TC 078404-G
------------------------------------X TENANTS: FRANK & CATHERINE WONG
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On November 13, 1986, the above-named owner filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on November 5, 1986 by a
District Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations
known as 138-15 Franklin Avenue, Flushing, New York, Apt. 603.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issues
raised by the petition for review.
This proceeding was commenced on November 7, 1983 by the tenants'
filing of a general rent overcharge complaint with the New York City
Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB), the agency then responsible for
the administration of rent stabilization in New York City.
The tenants took occupancy of the subject apartment pursuant to a one-
year lease commencing October 1, 1978 and expiring on September 30,
1979 at a rent of $410.00.
On December 13, 1983 the CAB sent the owner a copy of the tenants'
complaint with a request that it submit a complete rental history for
the subject apartment.
In an answer dated January 16, 1984, the owner, by its agent,
asserted, in pertinent part, that the rent being charged was in
accordance with Rent Stabilization guidelines.
On April 1, 1984 responsibility for the administration of rent
stabilization in New York City was transferred to the New York State
Division of Housing and Community Renewal.
DOC.NO.: AK 110361-RO
A "Final Notice of Pending Default" was mailed to the owner on July
29, 1986 by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (D.H.C.R.),
giving the owner another opportunity to provide the rental history for
the subject apartment. The owner still failed to comply with the
D.H.C.R.'s request for a rental history, although it requested a copy
of the complaint.
In the order reviewed herein, the Administrator found that the owner
had failed to submit a complete rental history, established the lawful
stabilized rent as of October 1, 1982 through September 30, 1985 at
$473.65 per month in accordance with the default procedure, and
computed total overcharges in the amount of $3,618.36 including excess
security and accrued interest from April 1, 1984.
In its petition, the owner asserts that on August 15, 1986 it
requested a copy of the tenants' complaint from the D.H.C.R. but that
it never received a copy. The owner requests that it be given an
opportunity to answer.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
this petition should be denied.
The record reveals that the CAB sent a copy of the tenants' complaint
to the owner on December 13, 1983, and that on January 17, 1984 the
CAB received an answer from the owner's then managing agent in which
it, among other things, specifically addressed the tenants' overcharge
complaint. On July 29, 1986, the D.H.C.R. sent the owner a "Final
Notice of Pending Default" giving the owner another opportunity to
provide the rental history for the subject apartment, which the owner
failed to do. Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the
Administrator correctly issued the order herein appealed based upon
the owner's default.
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, denied,and
that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same hereby is,
affirmed; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Bist Management and Eilat Management shall
DOC.NO.: AK 110361-RO
immediately refund to the tenants all amounts not yet refunded
representing overcharges, interest and excess security; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that if Bist Management and Eilat Management have not
refunded the stated amounts as of the expiration of the time for
commencing a proceeding under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and
Rules for judicial review of this order, the tenants may recover such
amounts by deducting them from the rent due to the owner at a rate not
in excess of twenty percent of the amount to be refunded for any one
month's rent. If, after such period, the owner has refunded no such
amounts and the tenants have not made any such deductions from their
rent as an offset, then the tenants may file and enforce a certified
copy of this order as a judgment for the amount of $3,618.36 against
Bist Management and Eilat Management, jointly and severally.