BH 410305 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. BH 410305 RO 

                                          :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
                                             DOCKET NO. TC 077353 G
           Taube Management Co.,                        CDR 30,778
           
                                             TENANT: Lyn Evans                
          
                            PETITIONER    : 
      ------------------------------------X                             

           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


      On August 4, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for 
      Administrative Review against an order issued on July 3, 1987, by the 
      Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, New York, concerning 
      the housing accommodations known as 100 Sullivan Street, New York, 
      New York, Apartment No. 3F, wherein the Rent Administrator determined 
      that the owner had overcharged the tenant.

      The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was filed prior to April 1, 
      1984.  Section 2526.1(a)(4) and 2521.1(d) of the Rent Stabilization Code 
      (effective May 1, 1987) governing rent overcharge and fair market rent 
      proceeding 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 Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the provisions 
      of Section 2526.1 of the current Rent Stabilization Code.

      The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator's order was 
      warranted.

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

      This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing of a rent 
      overcharge complaint by the tenant in October 1983.  The owner was 
      served with a copy of the tenant's complaint and submitted a complete 
      rental history as required. 

      In Order Number CDR 30,778, the Rent Administrator established the 
      lawful stabilized rent as $576.14 effective November 1, 1985, determined 
      that the tenant had been overcharged and directed a refund to the tenant 
      of $4,971.20 including interest on overcharges collected on and after 
      April 1, 1984.







          BH 410305 RO


      In this petition, the owner contends in substance that Taube Management 
      is the agent for the Partnership of Miklos Taube and Morris A. Paley; 
      and that the Rent Administrator's order did not consider that the rent 
      charged the prior tenant (K. Ross) was a preferential rent based on the 
      tenant's familiar relationship with co-partner, Morris A. Paley.

      A review of the apartment registrations on file with DHCR indicates that 
      the tenant vacated the subject apartment prior to March 1992 and no 
      forwarding address is on file.

      The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.

      An examination of the record in this case discloses that the owner 
      submitted rent ledgers for the subject apartment from May 1, 1974 
      through October 31, 1982 which indicated that the prior tenant Kenny 
      Ross paid the following rents during his tenancy:

           8/1/76    -    7/31/78   =    $378.55
           8/1/78    -    7/31/79   =    $391.80
           8/1/79    -    7/31/81   =    $425.10
           8/1/81    -    7/31/82   =    $523.76
           8/1/82    -    10/31/82  =    $550.00

      Although a notation hand-written on the rent ledger indicates that the 
      rent from August 1, 1980 through July 31, 1981 was $471.86, the owner 
      only collected $425.10 for that term.

      The Rent Administrator correctly cited in the order and applied the 
      principle established in Collingwood Enterprises v. Gribetz (N.Y.L.J. 
      April 24, 1975 p.17 col. 6 (Sup. NY O. Fine J) that the increases 
      permitted by the Rent Stabilization Law are maximum rents and the owner 
      is not prohibited from collecting less than the maximum rent.  In 
      addition, where the owner failed to charge the maximum permitted rent 
      increase that increase may not be reflected in the Base rent when 
      computing the subsequent rents.  

      An examination of the records in this case discloses that in the 
      proceeding before the Rent Administrator, the owner did not raise the 
      issue of the relationship of the prior tenant and co-owner nor that the 
      prior rent was preferential although afforded an opportunity to do so 
      and has not submitted a reasonable excuse for its failure to do so.  
      Since this is not a de novo proceeding the owner's contention that there 
      was no overcharge to the tenant because the prior tenant's rent was 
      preferential cannot be considered for the first time on appeal.

      Accordingly, the Rent Administrator's order was warranted.

      Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through June 30, 
      1987, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent rents to an amount no 
      greater than that determined by the Rent Administrator's order plus any 
      lawful increases, and to register any adjusted rents with this order and 
      opinion being given as the explanation for the adjustment.

      This order may, 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, be filed and enforced in the same manner as a judgment.



          BH 410305 RO

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

      ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and the same 
      hereby is, denied, and, that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and 
      the same hereby is, affirmed.  A copy of this order is being served on 
      the current occupant of the subject apartment.



      ISSUED:



                                                                    
                                      JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                      Acting 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