ARL 11684-B
                                  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  SJR No. 2323
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO. ARL 11684-B

                                              :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
               Prudential Netherland             DOCKET NO. B-3101435-R
               Properties,
                                                 TENANT:    Miriam    Gross
           

                                PETITIONER    : 
          ------------------------------------X 

             ORDER AND OPINION AFFIRMING COMMISSIONER'S PRIOR ORDER AND
                              OPINION AFTER COURT REMIT

          This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing of a  rent
          overcharge complaint by  the  tenant  of  Apartment  3B  at  5635
          Netherland  Avenue,   Bronx,   New   York,   wherein   the   Rent
          Administrator determined that the tenant had been overcharged.

          By  order  issued  on  June  6,  1986,  the  Rent   Administrator
          determined the lawful  stabilized  rent  using  the  Section  42A
          default procedure, based on  the  owner's  failure  to  submit  a
          complete  rental  history,  and  directed  the  owner  to  refund
          overcharges, including treble damages  on  overcharges  collected
          on or after April 1, 1984, totalling $8,052.09.

          The owner thereafter filed a petition for  administrative  review
          challenging the Administrator's order.  By order issued on  April
          29, 1987 the Commissioner denied the owner's petition  and  found
          that the Administrator properly applied  the  default  procedure,
          based on the  owner's  failure  to  submit  the  required  rental
          history, or to offer an adequate explanation for its  failure  to
          submit such data to prove the lawfulness of the rent charged.

          The owner subsequently filed a  petition  in  the  Supreme  Court
          pursuant to Article 78  of  the  Civil  Practice  Law  and  Rules
          challenging the Commissioner's order. 

          By order of Justice Harold Tompkins dated October 28,  1987,  the
          proceeding was remitted to  the  DHCR  to  afford  the  owner  an
          opportunity to explain its failure  to  supply  the  full  rental
          history.

          In accordance with the above court order, on June 13,  1991,  the
          owner was afforded an  opportunity  to  explain  its  failure  to
          submit a complete rental history for the subject  apartment  from
          the base date, and  was  notified  that  failure  to  submit  the
          requested information would result in a  determination  based  on
          the record.  On June 27, 1991 the owner  requested  an  extension
          until October 10, 1991, to respond to  the  Division's  June  13,
          1991 request, which was granted.   In  a  telephone  conversation






          ARL 11684-B
          with a Division employee on April 10, 1992, the attorney for  the
          petitioner acknowledged receipt of the grant of the extension  to
          respond to the Division's request.  To this date, no response has 
          been received.

          By letter dated November 1, 1991, the tenant indicated  that  she
          had reached a settlement with the owner and  indicated  that  she
          wished to withdraw her original rent  overcharge  complaint,  and
          requested termination of the proceeding.

          The Commissioner finds  that  the  petitioner  has  defaulted  in
          providing a complete rental history, and has not,  despite  ample
          opportunity, provided an adequate explanation for  said  default.
          Accordingly, the  order  of  the  Rent  Administrator  should  be
          affirmed.

          Regarding  the  tenant's  attempt  to   withdraw   her   original
          overcharge complaint, the Commissioner finds that nullifying  the
          Administrator's order establishing  the  lawful  stabilized  rent
          based  on  the  settlement  and  withdrawal  of  the   overcharge
          complaint would deprive subsequent  tenants  of  the  benefit  of
          paying the adjusted lawful  rent  based  on  the  Administrator's
          order.  Therefore the  settlement  including  withdrawal  of  the
          overcharge complaint is not approved.

          The Commissioner notes that, to the extent  that  the  settlement
          may have reduced the total amount to be refunded to the tenant in 
          exchange for other consideration, this is  a  contractual  matter
          between  the  parties  not  within  the  purview  of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Law and Code and not subject to the jurisdiction of 
          the DHCR.

          The lawful stabilization rent from July 1, 1975 through June  30,
          1984 has been established as $202.55.  The  total  overcharge  is
          $8,052.09.

          Because this determination concerns  lawful  rents  only  through
          June 30, 1984, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent  rents
          to an  amount  no  greater  than  that  determined  by  the  Rent
          Administrator's order plus any lawful increases, and to  register
          any adjusted rents with this order and opinion being given as the 
          explanation for the adjustment.


          This order may, upon the expiration of the period  in  which  the
          owner may institute a proceeding pursuant to Article  78  of  the
          Civil 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  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, it is

          ORDERED, that the Commissioner's order and opinion issued 
          April 29, 1987 be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:
                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA






          ARL 11684-B
                                          Acting 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