BE 410408 RO

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK   11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: BE 410408 RO

                                                  DRO DOCKET NO.: TC-073678-G
                                                  TENANT:  LOLA ABT


          On  May  21,  1987,  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review of an order  issued  on  April
          16, 1987, by the District Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, 
          New York, New York, concerning housing  accommodations  known  as
          Apartment 10F, located at 121 East 31st  Street,  New  York,  New
          York wherein the Rent Administrator determined  that  the  tenant
          had been overcharged.

          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, and this proceeding is being determined 
          in accordance therewith.

          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 originally commenced by the filing of a  rent
          overcharge complaint  by  the  tenant  with  the  New  York  City
          Conciliation and Appeals Board  (CAB),  one  of  the  predecessor
          agencies to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR). 
          The tenant took occupancy pursuant to a lease commencing November 
          1, 1979 and expiring October  31,  1981  at  a  monthly  rent  of

          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.  In answer to the complaint, the owner stated 
          that the apartment was decontrolled on January 1, 1976; and  that
          "new services had been added which make up the difference between 

          BE 410408 RO
          the actual and maximum increases".

          The owner submitted among other things, copies of all leases from 
          January 1, 1976, except that  of  tenant  Sturm,  who  the  owner
          indicated occupied  the  apartment  from  July  1,  1979  through
          October 1979.

          In  Order  Number  30,005,  the   District   Rent   Administrator
          determined that the tenant  was  overcharged  in  the  amount  of
          $6,475.46, including interest  on  overcharges  collected  on  or
          after April 1, 1984, and directed  that  the  owner  refund  such
          amount  to  the  tenant.    The   District   Rent   Administrator
          established the lawful  stabilized  rent  at  $460.43  per  month
          through October 31, 1986, and directed that the  rent  be  rolled
          back to that sum, with subsequent renewals and vacancy leases  to
          be computed above this rent.

          In this petition, the  owner  contends  that  the  District  Rent
          Administrator's order was incomplete, as it failed to  include  a
          copy of the rent calculation chart; and that  the  owner  had  no
          basis for review of the order.  On July 18, 1991  the  owner  was
          sent a copy of the rent calculation charts.  In answer the  owner
          asserted  that  the  calculations  were  incorrect,  specifically
          noting the increase for lease  number  5  (November  1,  1979  to
          October 31, 1981), and alleged that  the  lawful  rent  for  that
          lease term should have been  $392.28,  rather  than  the  $362.90
          permitted by the Administrator.

          In answer to this petition, the tenant contends  that  the  order
          should be upheld because her initial rent was in  excess  of  the
          lawful stabilization rent.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should  be

          The Commissioner finds that the Court-approved  rule  prohibiting
          the  compounding  of  guidelines  increases   within   the   same
          guidelines period is applicable to the instant proceeding.

          The owner's allegation of  error  regarding  the  Administrator's
          finding that the legal regulated rent for lease number 5  in  the
          rent calculation chart was $362.90, when viewed in light  of  the
          aforementioned provision, can clearly be  seen  to  be  mistaken:
          lease number 4, commencing July 1,  1979,  and  lease  number  5,
          commencing November 1, 1979,  both  fall  under  Rent  Guidelines
          Board Order Number 11.  Increasing $295.40 (the  legal  regulated
          rent charged and paid on June 30, 1979) by a 5% vacancy  increase
          for lease No. 4, plus 17% (5% vacancy and 12% guidelines increase 
          under Rent Guidelines Board Order Number  11)  brings  the  legal
          regulated rent to the $362.90 found by the Administrator.

          This order may, upon the expiration of the period  in  which  the
          owner may institute a proceedi g  pursuant  to  Article  Seventy-
          Eight of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, be filed and  enforced
          by the tenant in the same manner as a judgment or not  in  excess
          of twenty percent thereof per month may  be  offset  against  any
          rent thereafter due the owner.

          BE 410408 RO
          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.

                                                  JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                  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