DOCKET NO.: BD410528-RO
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.: BD410528-RO
37 HOLDING COMPANY, : D.R.O. DOCKET NO.: L-3114084-RT
: TENANT: ROBERT LICHTERMAN
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN
On April 14, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
March 11, 1987, by the District Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus
Circle, New York, New York, concerning housing accommodations
known as Apartment 10-C, 514 West End Avenue, New York, New
York, wherein the District Rent Administrator determined that the
owner had overcharged the tenant.
The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was initiated prior
to April 1, 1984. Sections 2526.1(a)(4) and 2521.1(d) of the
Rent Stabilization Code (effective May 1, 1987) governing rent
overcharge and fair market rent proceedings provide that
determination of these matters be based upon the law or code
provisions in effect on March 31, 1984. Therefore, unless
otherwise indicated, reference to sections of the Rent
Stabilization Code (Code) contained herein are to the Code in
effect on April 30, 1987.
The issue in this appeal is whether the District Rent
Administrator's order was warranted.
The applicable sections of the law are Section 10B of the former
Rent Stabilization Code and Section 2526.1 of the current Rent
DOCKET NO.: BD410528-RO
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issue raise by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on March 25, 1984, by the tenant's
filing of a rent overcharge complaint with the New York City
Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB), the agency formerly charged
with enforcing the Rent Stabilization Law.
In Order Number CDR 29,384 issued March 11, 1987, the District
Rent Administrator determined that the tenant had been
overcharged since October 1, 1975 and accordingly directed the
owner to refund to the tenant overcharges of $1,522.51 which
included excess security and interest on that portion of the
overcharge occurring on or after April 1, 1984.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the
District Rent Administrator failed to include in the calculations
of his legal regulated rents two major capital improvement (MCI)
rent increases: one ($4.52) for the heating system
modernization/upgrading effective in June 1974 and one ($1.29)
for elevator upgrading effective in September 1974. Also the
Administrator mistakenly considered the tenant's decontrol lease
as a three-year lease and used an incorrect commencement date for
the tenant's next lease.
In response, the tenant contends in substance that the owner has
not issued renewal leases in a timely fashion.
On May 3, 1991, the Administrative Review Unit of the Division of
Housing and Community Renewal requested from the petitioner
copies of the orders authorizing rent increases for the two
above-mentioned MCI's. The petitioner did not submit a response
to this request.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
granted in part.
A review of the rental history for the subject apartment
indicates that the tenant's initial lease commencing on October
1, 1972 was a two year vacancy lease which terminated on
September 30, 1974. The Rent Administrator incorrectly
considered this lease as a three year lease. The Commissioner
also notes that the tenant's two year renewal lease commenced on
May 1, 1975 rather than October 1, 1975 as stated by the
Administrator. Based on the foregoing, the Commissioner finds
that the Rent Administrator erred in computing the legal
regulated rents. The Commissioner has recalculated the lawful
stabilization rents and amounts of overcharge on the amended
rent calculation chart attached hereto and made a part hereof.
With regard to the owner's contention that it was authorized to
collect two MCI rent increases in 1974, the Commissioner notes
that the owner has not submitted any evidence to support this
claim, and therefore this claim is rejected by the Commissioner.
If the owner has already complied with the Rent Administrator's
order and there are arrears due to the owner as a result of the
instant determination, the tenant shall be permitted to pay off
the arrears in twenty-four equal monthly installments. Should
DOCKET NO.: BD410528-RO
the tenant vacate after the issuance of this order or have
already vacated, said arrears shall be payable immediately.
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, the tenant may offset against any rent
thereafter due the owner not in excess of twenty percent per
month of the remaining overcharge.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be and the same hereby is, granted in
part, and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and
the same hereby is, modified in accordance with this order and
The lawful stabilized rents and amounts of overcharge are
established on the attached chart which is fully made a part of
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BUREAU
ARB Docket No.: BD-410528-RO
DRO Docket No/Order No.: L-3114084-RT
Tenant(s): ROBERT LICHTERMAN
Owner: 37 HOLDING COMPANY
Premises: 514 WEST END AVENUE, NEW YORK, NY, APARTMENT 10-C.
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Administrator used incorrect lease terms in calculating the lawful
stabilization rent. Rent recalculated using the proper lease terms
showing a lesser amount of overcharge.
Mailed copies of Order and Determination to:
Date: : by