ART 08825 B, ART 08826 B, ART 08861 B and ARL 09062 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 
      IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE    ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
      APPEALS OF                             DOCKET NO.: ART 08825 B;
                                             ART 08826 B, ART 08861 B
                                             ARL 09062 B
           
           3333 Operating Corp.              DRO DOCKET NO.: B 003363-R;
                   and                       B 003402-R, B 003405-R,
           Various tenants residing at       B 003396-R
           3333 Henry Hudson Parkway
           Bronx, NY, 
                                                                              
                              PETITIONERS   
      ------------------------------------X                             


        ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDINGS TO THE RENT ADMINISTRATOR


      On March 19, 1986 and March 28, 1986, the above petitioners-tenants and 
      garage operator filed Petitions for Administrative Review against the 
      above mentioned orders issued on February 21, 1986, by the Rent 
      Administrator located at Gertz Plaza, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,  
      New York, concerning garage rentals at 3333 Henry Hudson Parkway, Bronx, 
      New York, wherein, based upon a corollary proceeding pending between the 
      Attorney General of the State of New York, and Hampton Management 
      Company involving an assurance of discontinuance which included the 
      garage rentals at the subject premises, the tenant complaints were 
      dismissed without prejudice to the tenants' right to file future 
      complaints of owner's failure to renew leases or other ancillary 
      matters. 

      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 appeals.  

      This proceeding was initially commenced after April 1, 1984 by various 
      tenants of the subject building filing complaints of rent overcharge for 
      garage spaces in the subject building.  Prior to the joinder of issue 
      and based upon what appeared to be a negotiated settlement between the 
      Attorney General of the State of New York and Hampton Management, the 
      Rent Administrator dismissed the tenant complaints on the basis that 
      such complaints of garage rent overcharge would be resolved in that 
      settlement.

      In the tenants' petitions, the tenants contend, in substance that the 
      proceeding before the Attorney General and Hampton Management did not 
      involve garage rent overcharges and the Rent Administrator's order 
      dismissing the complaints on that basis was therefore improper.

      The owner in its answer to the Petitions asserts in substance that the 
      DHCR has no jurisdiction, that the garage operator should have been made 







          ART 08825 B, ART 08826 B, ART 08861 B and ARL 09062 B

      a party to the proceeding and that the complaint is time barred since 
      the tenants did not file objections to the 1984 rent registration.

      In its petition, the garage operator alleges in substance that it is an 
      independent contractor and not an owner so that the DHCR does not have 
      personal jurisdiction over it.

      The Commissioner is of the opinion that these proceedings should be 
      remanded to the Administrator for further processing.

      The record establishes that the Administrator's determination to dismiss 
      was based solely upon the Attorney General's apparently assuming 
      jurisdiction of tenant complaints of garage rent overcharge.  It appears 
      however that the Attorney General in fact did not determine these 
      overcharge complaints.  Moreover the DHCR is not estopped from 
      exercising its expertise and determining the lawful regulated rent for 
      the garages from the base date by virtue of an Assurance of 
      Discontinuance between the owner and the Attorney General.

      With regard to the owner's contention that the complaints are time 
      barred because the tenants did not file an objection to the 1984 initial 
      registration, it is noted that the garage and the rent paid therefor 
      were not included on the 1984 initial registration statements so that 
      the 90 days within which to object to a 1984 registered rent did not 
      begin to run.

      With regard to the garage operator's petition, the DHCR does not claim 
      jurisdiction over the garage operator.  The Administrator's orders 
      appealed herein properly did not mane the garage operator in the 
      caption.  However regarding any overcharges determined on remand, it is 
      noted that the current and former owners may seek reimbursement from the 
      garage operator in a court of competent jurisdiction.

      Accordingly, the Commissioner determines that this matter should be, 
      remanded to the Administrator to determine the tenants' complaints of 
      garage rent overcharges on the merits.

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

      ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, granted to 
      the extent of remanding these proceedings to the Rent Administrator for 
      further processing in accordance with this order and opinion. 

      ISSUED:



                                                                  
                                      JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                      Acting Deputy Commissioner