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.: BD 110389-RO
DRO DOCKET NO.: ZQ 000226-R
CO., PETITIONER :
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 28, 1987 the above named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against an order issued on April 17, 1987 by the
District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York
concerning housing accommodations known as Apartment 6-F at 99-44 62nd
Avenue Rego Park, New York wherein the District Rent Administrator
determined that the owner had overcharged the tenant.
The issue in this appeal is whether the District Rent Administrator's
order was warranted.
The applicable sections of the Law are Section 26-516 of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Section 2526.1(a) of the current Rent Stabilization
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 appeal.
This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing in January, 1985 of
a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant, in which she stated that she
had commenced occupancy on November 30, 1984 at a rent of $625.50 per
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and was requested to
submit rent records to prove the lawfulness of the rent being charged.
The only submission from the owner contained in the file of the proceeding
before the Administrator consists of the 1984 apartment registration and
of a certification of mailing by the Rent Stabilization Association.
In an order issued on April 17, 1987, the District Rent Administrator
determined that the tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $60.49 as
of November 30, 1985, and directed the owner to refund such overcharge to
the tenant as well as to reduce the rent.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that there was no rent
overcharge in that the District Rent Administrator's order failed to take
DOCKET NUMBER: BD 110389-RO
into account a renewal lease of the prior tenants, submitted to the
Administrator. With its petition the owner has enclosed a renewal lease
from July 1, 1984 to June 30, 1985 at a rent of $569.05.
The tenant did not submit an answer to the owner's petition, although
given an opportunity to do so.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be granted.
The $569.05 rent in the renewal lease which the owner has now submitted,
and claims to have submitted previously, represents a lawful increase
over the $547.15 rent in those tenant's prior lease. The complainant's
vacancy lease began on November 15, 1984, during Guideline period 16.
Guideline 16 allowed an increase of 13 1/2% (7 1/2% vacancy allowance
plus 6% for a one-year lease) over the September 30, 1984 rent of $569.05,
for a permissible rent of $645.87. Since the owner charged the tenant
only $625.50, there has been no overcharge shown in that lease.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted and that
the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
revoked since there was no rent overcharge.