ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BE 410389 RO & BB 410208 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 NOS.:
BE 410389 RO,
BB 410208 RO
:
DRO DOCKET NO.:
33786
JOSEPH HANDLER,
TENANT: Tommaso Colucci
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On February 24, 1987, the above named petitioner-owner filed
Petitions for Administrative Review against an order issued on
January 20, 1987, by the District Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus
Circle, New York, New York, concerning housing accommodations
known as Apartment 1504, 21 West 86th Street, New York, New York,
wherein the District Rent Administrator determined that the owner
had overcharged the tenant.
The Commissioner notes that the instant appeal was
inadvertently given two different docket numbers listed above.
The issue in this appeal is whether the District Rent
Administrator's order was warranted.
The applicable section of the law is 2526.1 of the Rent
Stabilization Code.
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.
This proceeding was commenced on September 29, 1984 by the
tenant's filing of an objection to the rent/services registration
wherein the tenant contended in substance that he was being
overcharged; an air conditioning electricity charge was omitted
by the owner as an apartment service; and that electricity,
maintenance and storage space were omitted by the owner as
building services. The tenant also complained of several
diminutions in building and apartment services.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BE 410389 RO & BB 410208 RO
In its answer to the tenant's objection, the owner
contended in substance that the subject apartment was under hotel
stabilization until July 17, 1985, that electricity was not
included in the rent except for a summer air conditioning charge,
that the tenant has been underpaying rent, that the tenant agreed
to an additional charge for air conditioning but did not pay the
charge, and that all services had been maintained at the same
level since the tenant moved in.
In Docket Number 33786 issued January 20, 1987, the District
Rent Administrator determined that the tenant had been
overcharged since January 1, 1983, and accordingly directed the
owner to refund to the tenant overcharges in the sum of $196.44
which includes 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's order is incorrect and should be
reversed because the tenant has not paid an air conditioner
charge for three years and the tenant is currently paying a
monthly rent of only $493.29 which is lower than the monthly
lawful stabilization rent of $524.80. In support of these
contentions, the owner submits a copy of the front side of a
check dated November 10, 1985 from the tenant made payable to"The
Brewster" in the sum of $493.29.
In response, the tenant contends in substance that the
owner's petition should be denied.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
be denied.
A review of the record in the instant case indicates that
the Administrator calculated the lawful stabilization rents and
amounts of overcharge for the subject apartment up until December
31, 1984. Accordingly, the amount of rent which the tenant paid
since 1985 is not relevant to the instant proceeding.
Additionally, the Commissioner notes that the Administrator's
order did not include any air conditioning charge in its
calculations of the lawful stabilization rents and amounts of
overcharge. Thus, the owner's contention that the tenant had not
paid an air conditioner charge for the past three years is
similarly irrelevant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are,
denied, and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and
the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BE 410389 RO & BB 410208 RO
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|