Docket Number: BD 110482-RO
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. BD 110482-RO
KALED MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO. Q-3120636-R
PETITIONER TENANT: Paul Lefkowitz
----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 15, 1987, the above-named owner filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on March 16, 1987 by a
District Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation
known as Apartment 201, 135-10 Grand Central Parkway, Jamaica, New
York, wherein the District Rent Administrator determined that the
tenant had been overcharged.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
The subject tenant filed a complaint of rent overcharge with the
New York City Conciliation and Appeals Board (C.A.B.), the agency
formerly charged with enforcement of the Rent Stabilization Law.
On April 1, 1984 responsibility for the administration of rent
stabilization in New York City was transferred to the New York
State of Division of Housing and Community Renewal (D.H.C.R.).
The tenant took occupancy pursuant to a three-year lease
commencing on March 1, 1978 and expiring on February 28, 1981 at a
monthly rent of $297.50.
In its answer the owner stated that there was no rent overcharge,
and submitted a complete rental history. The complainant's
initial lease states that the "rental includes a new refrigerator
and a new gas range."
In the order under review herein, the Administrator found that the
owner had overcharged the tenant in the amount of $1,612.55,
including excess security and accrued interest from April 1, 1984.
In this petition, the owner asserts that the Administrator did not
take into account the cost of the installation of a new
Docket Number: BD 110482-RO
refrigerator, gas range, and venetian blinds allegedly installed
prior to the complainant's initial occupancy. The owner further
alleges that if 1/40th of the total cost of the new equipment is
added to the initial rent charged, then there would have been no
rent overcharge found. Attached to the petition the owner submits
invoices for the gas range and for the venetian blinds.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
The Commissioner finds that the owner did not submit any proof of
the cost of installing the new refrigerator it asserts it
installed. As the petition states that the owner is not able to
locate any bills for that refrigerator the Commissioner is of the
opinion that its claimed cost should not be added to the legal
regulated rent.
The petition raises the issue of venetian blinds being installed
by the owner in the subject apartment. As the owner has not
established that the issue of the venetian blinds which it raises
for the first time upon administrative review could not reasonably
have been offered or included in the proceeding before the District
Rent Administrator, it is outside the scope of the Commissioner's
review in this proceeding and will not be considered in
establishing the rent.
The Commissioner notes that on the bottom of the answer form mailed
to the owner by the Administrator it stated: "For increases based
on new equipment or services, you must attach invoice(s) showing
costs and date(s) of equipment provided or service installed, and
tenant's written consent, if necessary." As the owner did not
submit proof of the cost of the gas range to the Rent
Administrator, and submits it for the first time upon
administrative review without explaining why it could not have been
submitted to the Administrator, it is outside the scope of the
Commissioner's review in this proceeding and will not be considered
in establishing the rent. Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that
the owner's petition should be denied, and that the Administrator's
order should be affirmed.
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, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that if the owner has refunded no such amounts
upon the expiration of the period for seeking judicial review of
Docket Number: BD 110482-RO
this order pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and
Rules, and the tenant has not credited any such amounts, the tenant
may file and enforce a certified copy of this order as a judgment
for the amount of $1,612.55 against Kaled Management Corporation.
ISSUED:
------------------------
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
