Docket Number: BA 410160-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 NO.: BA 410160-RT 
                                            :  
             JOHN M. DEGENSHEIN,               DRO DOCKET NO.: ZL 004126-R  

                              PETITIONER    : 
        ------------------------------------X                           
          
           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On January 22,  1987,  the  above-named  petitioner-tenant  filed  a
        Petition for  Administrative  Review  against  an  order  issued  on
        December 31, 1986, by the District Rent Administrator,  92-31  Union
        Hall   Street,   Jamaica,   New   York,   concerning   the   housing
        accommodations known as Apartment 11F, 250  East  73rd  Street,  New
        York, New York, wherein the District Rent  Administrator  determined
        that the tenant had not been overcharged.  

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

        The applicable section of the law is Section 2526.1(a)(3)(i) of  the
        Rent Stabilization Code.

        The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has 
        carefully considered that portion of  the  record  relevant  to  the
        issue raised by the administrative appeal.

        This proceeding was commenced on October 1,  1985  by  the  tenant's
        filing of a rent overcharge complaint wherein the  tenant  contended
        in substance that he was being  overcharged  for  his  rental  of  a
        garage space and that  he  did  not  receive  a  copy  of  the  1984
        Apartment Registration.  The  Commissioner  notes  that  the  tenant
        included with his complaint a "Tenant's Copy" of the 1984  Apartment
        Registration Form (RR-1) dated June 20, 1984.

        On May 2, 1986, the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) 
        requested from the owner documentation evidencing proof  of  service
        upon the tenant of the 1984 Apartment Registration Form.

        In its response, the owner stated  that  a  careful  search  of  its
        records failed to reveal any of the documents requested.  The  owner
        further contended that the tenant had enclosed with his complaint  a
        copy of the Apartment Registration Form,  and  that  therefore,  the
        tenant's complaint was, in itself, a signed admission of receipt  of
        the apartment registration.








        Docket Number: BA 410160-RT

        In Docket No. ZL 004126-R issued December  31,  1986,  the  District
        Rent Administrator determined that  the  owner  had  registered  the
        April 1, 1984 rent for the subject apartment and had served the 
        tenant with the Apartment Registration Form; that the tenant  failed
        to file a timely Tenant's Objection to the April 1, 1984 rent;  that
        therefore the April 1, 1984 registered rent became the initial legal 
        regulated rent; that the garage rent ($250.00) charged and collected 
        by the owner at the time of the  tenant's  complaint  was  the  same
        amount set forth as the  initial  legal  regulated  rent;  and  that
        therefore no overcharge occurred.

        In this petition, the tenant contends in substance that the District 
        Rent Administrator's order  is  incorrect  and  should  be  reversed
        because the original  overcharge  complaint  claimed  an  overcharge
        going back to June 1, 1982; he never received copies of the  owner's
        answer or of the  Apartment  Registration  Form;  there  was  common
        ownership of the apartment building and garage, therefore the garage 
        space rental is rent stabilized; and the case of Matter of Mid-State 
        Management Corp.  v.  CAB, 491 NYS 2d 634  (2d  Dept.  1985),  holds
        that where common ownership of a building  and  garage  occurs,  the
        owner cannot obtain rent increases such as those which  occurred  in
        the instant case.

        In its response to the tenant's  petition,  the  owner  contends  in
        substance that the Administrator's order should be affirmed  because
        the 1984 apartment registration was timely served upon the tenant as 
        evidenced by the tenant's attachment of the "tenant's copy"  of  the
        registration to his original complaint.

        In rebuttal, the tenant  contends  in  substance  that  the  owner's
        answer completely ignores the basis for his  petition,  namely  that
        since his apartment is stabilized, his garage space should  also  be
        stabilized due to the common ownership of the apartment and  garage;
        that for the past several years the owner has tried to  confuse  the
        tenants by first insisting that the garage space was not subject  to
        stabilization, and now conceding that the garage is  stabilized  but
        asserting in  defense  that  the  tenant  did  not  timely  file  an
        objection  to  the  rent  increase;  and  that  he  is  particularly
        concerned with the jump in his garage rent from $190.00  to  $250.00
        as of June 1, 1984.

        On April 23, 1987, the tenant, through his  attorney,  contended  in
        substance that neither he nor any of the other tenants of the garage 
        ever received the 1984 registration until 1985;  that  in  1984  the
        owner  was  insisting  that  the   garage   was   not   subject   to
        stabilization; that it was only in  1985  that  the  owner  filed  a
        Notice of Rent Increase (which the tenant alleges to  have  attached
        to his complaint); and that it was in response to this  1985  notice
        of increase  that  the  tenant  immediately  and  timely  filed  his
        complaint.  The tenant further contended that  in  a  separate  case
        under Docket No. ZL 002160-R, another tenant  of  the  garage  under
        virtually identical circumstances was granted a rent  reduction  due
        to an overcharge.


        The Commissioner is of the opinion  that  this  petition  should  be
        denied.







        Docket Number: BA 410160-RT

        Section 2526.1(a)(3)(i) of the Rent Stabilization Code  provides  in
        pertinent part that except as to complaints filed within ninety days 
        of the initial apartment registration, 

             ... the legal regulated rent for purposes of determining 
             an overcharge shall be deemed to be the rent shown in 
             the annual registration statement filed four years prior 
             to the most recent registration statement (or, if more 
             recently filed, the initial registration statement), 
             plus in each case any subsequent lawful increases and
             adjustments.

        The evidence of record in the instant case  indicates  that  in  his
        original overcharge complaint  the  tenant  alleged  that  he  never
        received a copy of the 1984 apartment registration, yet  the  tenant
        enclosed with his complaint a "Tenant's Copy" of the 1984  Apartment
        Registration dated June 20,  1984.   Furthermore,  the  Commissioner
        notes that the tenant  has  also  contradicted  himself  on  appeal,
        initially alleging in his petition that he never received a copy 
        of  the  apartment  registration  form,  and  then  alleging  in   a
        subsequent submission that he  didn't  receive  the  1984  apartment
        registration  until  1985.   The  Commissioner  finally  notes  that
        although the tenant alleged to  have  received  the  1984  apartment
        registration in 1985 together with a Notice  of  Increase  which  in
        turn caused him to file an overcharge complaint, no such  notice  of
        increase regarding the garage space rental was ever submitted by the 
        tenant either in the  proceeding  before  the  Administrator  or  on
        appeal.  Based  on  the  foregoing,  the  Commissioner  rejects  the
        tenant's contention of never being served with  the  1984  apartment
        registration, and finds that the Administrator correctly  determined
        that the tenant had failed to file a timely Tenant's Objection.   

        Since the tenant failed to file a timely objection  to  the  initial
        apartment registration, the registered garage rent of $250.00 became 
        the initial legal regulated garage rent.  The  Commissioner  further
        notes that at the time of his complaint, the tenant was still paying 
        a garage rent of $250.00.  Accordingly, the Commissioner finds  that
        the Administrator correctly determined that no overcharge  occurred.
        Contrary to the tenant's contention  on  appeal,  the  garage  space
        rental was correctly  considered  a  rent  stabilized  unit  by  the
        Administrator.

        Finally, with regard to the tenant's contention that another  tenant
        of the garage was given a  rent  reduction  in  virtually  identical
        circumstances under Docket  Number  ZL  002160-R,  the  Commissioner
        notes that the above-mentioned case is wrongly relied  upon  by  the
        tenant because in that case the Administrator also  found  that  the
        tenant  did  not  file  a  timely   objection   to   the   apartment
        registration.  The Commissioner further notes that the tenant has 







        Docket Number: BA 410160-RT

        incorrectly relied on the case of Mid-State Management Corp. v. CAB, 
        supra, which merely holds that where an owner owns both  a  building
        and swimming pool,  the  swimming  pool  is  considered  a  required
        service which is subject to the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and  rent
        guidelines.

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

        ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,  and
        that the District  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