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

          APPEAL OF                            :  DOCKET NUMBER: BG-210370-RO
              ALL ISLAND REALTY,               :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
                                               :  DOCKET NUMBER: CDR20,541,  
                                               :                 AS AMENDED
                                   PETITIONER  :  TENANT:  MARGARET NIEWIEROWSKI


          On July  29,  1987,  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against  an  order  issued  on
          July 1, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle,  New
          York, New York concerning the  housing  accommodations  known  as
          Apartment 4-B,  199  East  Second  Street,  Brooklyn,  New  York,
          wherein the Rent Administrator determined that there had been  an
          overcharge and ordered a refund of $12,787.88,  including  treble
          damages and excess security.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in  the  record
          and  has  carefully  considered  that  portion  of   the   record
          concerning the issues raised by the administrative appeal.

          The tenant commenced this proceeding  on  February  14,  1984  by
          filing an overcharge complaint with the New York City 

          Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB), the agency formerly charged 
          with enforcing the Rent Stabilization Law.

          On March 2, 1989 the CAB notified the owner of the complaint  and
          advised the owner to preserve its rent records and that,  in  the
          absence thereof,  the  rent  would  be  established  pursuant  to
          Section 42A of the  former Rent Stabilization Code.

          On October 24, 1984, the DHCR served the owner with a copy of the 
          complaint  together  with  an  answer  form  [RS-1(7-84)]   which
          requested leases or other rent records to document the rental 

          history of the subject apartment.  The owner  was  again  advised
          that failure to produce a completely documented rental history 
          would result in the establishment  of  the  lawful  rent  by  the
          Division.  In addition, the owner was further advised that treble 
          damages could be imposed.

          In answer to the complaint, the owner through its managing agent, 

          DOCKET NUMBER: BG-210370-RO
          M. Lob, submitted a completed answer  form  indicating  that  the
          base date for the subject apartment was June 30, 1974 and listing 
          prior rents from April 1, 1974 until the complaining tenant's 
          initial rent of $335.00, commencing August 15, 1983.  However, no 
          documentation whatsoever was submitted with the owner's answer.

          On May 7, 1986 a Final Notice  of  Pending  Default  [RNR6  (Rev.
          4/86)] advised the  owner  that  it  had  failed  to  submit  the
          required documentation and described the  default  procedure  for
          establishing the stabilized rent.  The owner was  again  notified
          of the possibility of treble damages unless the owner proved  the
          overcharges, if any, were not willful.

          On May 20, 1986, the owner responded by  saying  the  tenant  had
          moved  to  an  unknown  address   in   California.    No   rental
          documentation was submitted.

          In  Order  Number  CDR20,541,  issued   August   5,   1986,   the
          Administrator found the owner in default for  having  "failed  to
          provide a full rental history for the subject apartment  although
          requested to do so."  That order listed an incorrect address  for
          the owner.  On July 1,  1987,  the  amended  order  herein  under
          review was issued,  the  only  amendment  being  to  correct  the
          owner's address.

          In this petition, the owner, through one  Martin  Rich,  contends
          that the Rent Administrator's Order is incorrect and should be 
          modified because the owner's address is not that  listed  in  the
          first order to which the complaint and all  other  correspondence
          was apparently mailed.  Accordingly, the owner alleges it was 
          never given the opportunity to respond.  In addition,  the  owner
          alleges that the tenant failed to file her  overcharge  complaint
          within 90 days of receiving the apartment registration  forms  on
          July 7, 1984.  Consequently, the complaint should  be  dismissed.
          Finally, the petitioner encloses a purported Report of  Statutory
          Decontrol (R-42) stating the apartment was decontrolled  in  1982
          and alleging that the prior tenant had received a fair market 

          rent of $315.00 on the first stabilized rent.  A copy of a  lease
          for the period March 15, 1982 through March 30, 1983 for a tenant 
          named Mehmet Ali is submitted with the owner's petition.

          In answer to this petition, the tenant contends  that  she  never
          received a copy of the petition.  The tenant's return address  is
          approximately one and a half blocks from the subject address.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should  be

          As the  above  procedural  history  of  this  proceeding  clearly
          demonstrates, the owner's assertion that it received no notice of 
          the complaint is belied by the owner's answer to same.  
          Furthermore, the complaint and default notice were  not  sent  to
          the incorrect address listed on the August 5, 1986 order, but  to

          DOCKET NUMBER: BG-210370-RO
          the same address given by the tenant in her complaint, which is 
          the address stated on the tenant's 1983-1984 lease.  Finally, the 
          owner's  claim  that  the  tenant's  complaint  was  untimely  is
          clearly without merit: the complaint was filed five months before 
          the apartment was registered.

          An Administrative appeal is not a  de  novo  proceeding,  but  is
          limited  to  the  issues  and  evidence  which  were  before  the
          Administrator.  Accordingly, since the  petitioner's  excuse  for
          not submitting the  rental  documents  to  the  Administrator  is
          without any merit,  that  evidence  will  not  be  considered  on
          appeal.   [The  fact  that  the  evidence  submitted  on   appeal
          indicating a 1982 base date is contradicted by the owner's answer 
          to the complaint, which stated a 1974 base date,  raises  serious
          doubt as to the credibility of the evidence offered on appeal.]

          The Commissioner notes that although the answer was  filed  by  a
          managing agent and the petition is signed by  a  partner  in  the
          company that owns the building, the rent registration records  of
          the Division list the same person who answered the  complaint  as
          the managing agent  from  1986  through  1990.   Furthermore,  in
          proceeding number KC000820-S, filed July 24,  1984,  the  address
          of the owner is  given  as  the  post  office  box  of  the  same
          individual.  It is well settled that a principal  is  responsible
          for an act of an agent within the scope of the agency.  

          Accordingly, the answer filed by the agent constitutes an  answer
          by the owner.  Indeed, the Code's definition of "owner"  includes
          an agent of the owner.

          Section 42A of the former Rent Stabilization Code  requires  that
          an owner retain complete records for each stabilized apartment in 
          effect from June 30, 1974  (or  the  date  the  apartment  became
          subject to rent stabilization, if later) to date and  to  produce
          such records to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
          upon demand.

          Section 26-516 of the Rent Stabilization Law, effective April  1,
          1984, limited an owner's obligation to provide  rent  records  by
          providing that an owner  may  not  be  required  to  maintain  or
          produce rent records for more than four years prior to  the  most
          recent registration, and concomitantly, established a four-year 
          limitation on the calculation of rent overcharges.

          It has been the  Division  of  Housing  and  Community  Renewal's
          policy  that overcharge complaints filed prior to April  1,  1984
          are to be processed pursuant to the law  or  Code  in  effect  on
          March 31, 1984. (See Section 2526.1(a)(4)  of  the  current  Rent
          Stabilization  Code.)  The  Division  of  Housing  and  Community
          Renewal has therefore applied Section 42A of the former Code to 
          overcharge complaints filed prior to  April  1,  1984,  requiring

          DOCKET NUMBER: BG-210370-RO
          complete rent records in these cases.  In following this  policy,
          the Division of Housing and Community Renewal has  sought  to  be
          consistent with the legislative intent of the Omnibus Housing Act 
          (Chapter 403, Laws of 1983), as implemented by the New York  City
          Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB), the predecessor  agency  to
          the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, to determine  rent
          overcharge complaints filed with the CAB prior to April  1,  1984
          by applying the law in effect at the time  such  complaints  were
          filed so as not to deprive such tenants of their  right  to  have
          the lawful stabilized rent determined from the June 30, 1974 base 
          date and so as not to deprive  tenants  whose  overcharge  claims
          accrued more than four years prior to  April  1,  1984  of  their
          right to recover such overcharges.  In such cases, if  the  owner
          failed  to  produce  the  required  rent  records,   the   lawful
          stabilized rent would be determined pursuant to the default 
          procedure approved by the Court of  Appeals  in  61  Jane  Street
          Associates v. CAB, 65 N.Y.2d 898, 493 N.Y.S.2d 455 (1985).

          However, it has recently been held in the case of J.R.D. Mgt.  v.
          Eimicke, 148 A.D.2d 610, 539 N.Y.S.2d 667  (App.  Div.  2d  Dep't
          1989), motion for leave to reargue or for leave to appeal to  the
          Court of Appeals denied (App. Div. 2d Dep't, N.Y.L.J.,  June  28,
          1989, p.25, col.1), motion for leave to appeal to the Court of 
          Appeals denied (Court of Appeals, N.Y.L.J., Nov. 24, 1989, 
          p. 24, col. 4)., motion for leave to reargue denied (Court of 
          Appeals, N.Y.L.J., Feb. 15, 1990, p. 25, col. 1), that the law in 
          effect at the time of the  determination  of  the  administrative
          complaint rather than the law in effect at the time of the filing 
          of the complaint must be applied and that the Division of Housing 
          and Community Renewal could not require an owner to produce  more
          than four years of rent records.

          Since  the  issuance  of  the  decision  in  JRD,  the  Appellate
          Division, First Department, in the case of Lavanant v. DHCR,  148
          A.D.2d 185, 544 N.Y.S.2d 331 (App. Div. 1st Dep't 1989), has 
          issued a decision in direct conflict with  the  holding  in  JRD.
          The Lavanant court expressly rejected  the  JRD  ruling,  finding
          that the Division of Housing and Community Renewal  may  properly
          require an owner to submit complete  rent  records,  rather  than
          records for just four years, and that such  requirement  is  both
          rational and supported by the law and legislative history of  the
          Omnibus Housing Act.

          Since in the instant case the subject dwelling unit is located in 
          the Second Department, the  Division  of  Housing  and  Community
          Renewal is constrained to follow the JRD decision in  determining
          the tenant's overcharge complaint, limiting the requirement for 
          rent records to April 1, 1980.  However, the owner  submitted  no
          rent records to the Administrator and therefore  was  in  default
          even under the standards of the JRD decision.   Accordingly,  the
          Commissioner finds that  the  Administrator  properly  determined
          the lawful stabilized rent based on default procedures.

          DOCKET NUMBER: BG-210370-RO

          The record shows that the  complaining  tenant  has  vacated  the
          subject apartment.

          The 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.

          A copy of this Order will be served on the current  tenant.   The
          Commissioner notes that the Administrator  established  the  rent
          for the complaining tenant's August 15, 1984 -  August  14,  1985
          lease as $222.85.  Subsequent rent  increases  should  have  been
          based on this figure.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code 
          it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same  hereby  is,  denied
          and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby  is,


                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                             Deputy Commissioner


                                               ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BUREAU
                                                COVERING MEMORANDUM

          ARB Docket No.:  BG-210370-RO

          DRO Docket No/Order No.:  CDR20,541, AS AMENDED

          Tenant(s): MARGARET NIEWIEROWSKI

          Owner:  ALL ISLAND REALTY

          Code Section:  42A

          Premises:  199 EAST SECOND STREET, NEW YORK, NY, APARTMENT 4-B


          Petitioner's allegation that  the  CAB  overcharge  complaint  had
          never been received is belied by the managing  agent's  answer  to
          same.  Accordingly, the owner's new evidence  on  appeal  was  not
          accepted and the owner remains in default even under JRD.


          Processing Attorney:                                             

          Supervising Attorney:                                            

          Bureau Chief:                                                    

          Deputy Counsel:                                                  

          Deputy Commissioner:                                             

          Mailed copies of Order and Determination to:
                         Tenant's Atty.       
                         Owner's Atty.        

          Date:                    : by                                   


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