ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. BL 410274 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. BL 410274 RO  
                                              :         DISTRICT        RENT
                                                 ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET  NO.
                                                 012893
              J. K. MANAGEMENT CORPORATION                 
                                                 Tenant: Frank Russo
                                PETITIONER    : 
          ------------------------------------X 

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On December 29, 1987, the above named owner filed a  petition
          for administrative review of an order issued on November 24,  1987
          by  a  District  Rent   Administrator   concerning   the   housing
          accommodation known as Apartment 6-C, 4  South  Pinehurst  Avenue,
          New York, New York.

               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 petition for review.  

               This proceeding was  commenced  by  the  tenant's  filing  an
          objection to the 1984 rent registration, dated July 30, 1984.

               The subject tenant took occupancy pursuant  to  a  three-year
          lease commencing on July 1, 1983 and expiring on June 30, 1984  at
          a monthly rent of $500.00.  

               On January 31, 1985 the Division  of  Housing  and  Community
          Renewal (D.H.C.R.) mailed to the owner  a  copy  of  the  tenant's
          objection, and an answer form requesting  that  the  owner  submit
          copies of all leases for the subject apartment, from the base rent 
          date to the date the complainant first took occupancy. 

               On October 8, 1985 D.H.C.R. mailed  to  the  owner  a  "Final
          Notice" requesting that the owner submit copies of all leases from 
          April 1, 1980 to the present.  The notice warned  the  owner  that
          failure to comply with D.H.C.R.'s request for  a  complete  rental
          history could result in the legal rent being calculated "by  using
          the last maximum base rent in effect when  subject  apartment  was
          decontrolled from the City Rent control Laws and  came  under  the
          Rent Stabilization Laws."  A similar notice was  sent  on  October
          11, 1985.  




               On December 4,  1985  the  owner  submitted  leases  for  the
          subject apartment from June  13,  1981  to  June  30,  1984.   The
          owner's answer stated that:  "We took over the building  in  March






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. BL 410274 RO
          1984.  The first lease in our  posession  is  as  of  7/1981,  for
          which we enclosed copies." 

               On May 9, 1986 D.H.C.R. mailed to the owner  a  "Request  For
          Additional Information/Evidence" requesting that the owner  submit
          leases or rent ledgers for the subject  apartment  from  April  1,
          1980 to June 30, 1981, within twenty days from the date of mailing 
          of this notice. 

               The owner's response, filed on May 15, 1986, stated that  "as
          previously written, this information was not given to us  when  we
          purchased the building in March, 1984."

               In the order reviewed herein, the  Administrator  found  that
          the owner had failed to submit a complete rental history and  that
          the tenant filed a timely objection to the 1984 registration,  and
          he determined that the legal regulated rent would  be  established
          by using D.H.C.R.'s default procedure.  The Administrator computed 
          total overcharges in the amount  of  $9,416.69,  including  excess
          security and accrued interest from April 1, 1984. 

               In this petition, the owner questions the  finding  that  the
          tenant's objection was filed timely, because the owner states,  it
          was not notified of the tenant's objection  until  1985,  and,  it
          further states, it has not been provided with a date-stamped  copy
          of the tenant's objection,  showing  when  D.H.C.R.  received  the
          complaint.  The owner believes that the objection  was  not  filed
          timely, and that the initial legal regulated rent charged  by  the
          owner was proper.  Also,  the  owner  contends  that  it  provided
          D.H.C.R. with a complete rental history of the subject apartment.

               In the tenant's answer to the owner's  petition,  the  tenant
          asserts that his objection to the 1984 rent registration was filed 
          timely, and that he should receive treble damages from the  amount
          he was overcharged by the owner. 

               After careful  consideration,  the  Commissioner  is  of  the
          opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner notes that the owner admits to receiving the 
          tenant's objection in 1985.  The record shows that the  owner  was
          given a full opportunity to respond to any issues arising  out  of
          the tenant's complaint.

               As to the issue  of  whether  the  tenant  timely  filed  the
          objection to the 1984 rent registration,  the  Commissioner  notes
          that the owner did not submit this issue to the Administrator.  As 
          this issue is submitted for the  first  time  upon  administrative
          review and the owner offered no explanation as to why  this  issue
          was not presented to the Administrator, it is outside the scope of 
          the Commissioner's review in this proceeding.  Accordingly, the 


          Commissioner  is  of  the   opinion   that   the   District   Rent
          Administrator's finding that the tenant's objection  to  the  1984
          rent registration was filed timely should not be disturbed.  

               The Commissioner finds  that  the  owner  did  not  submit  a
          complete  rental  history  to  the  Administrator.   The   owner's






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. BL 410274 RO
          assertion that a complete rental  history  was  submitted  to  the
          Administrator is contradicted by the  owner's  statements  to  the
          Administrator that it did not have the required rental history  in
          its possession.  The Commissioner notes that the record  does  not
          include any leases submitted by the owner prior to June 1981.  

               The Commissioner notes that as the  tenant  did  not  file  a
          petition for administrative review  pertaining  to  the  issue  of
          treble damages for the amount the tenant  was  being  overcharged,
          that issue is not subject to review by the  Commissioner  in  this
          proceeding.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion  that  the
          Administrator's order should be affirmed.

               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; and it is 

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the owner shall immediately  refund  to
          the tenant all amounts not yet refunded  representing  overcharges
          and penalties; and it is 

               FURTHER ORDERED, that if  the  owner  has  refunded  no  such
          amounts upon the expiration of the  period  for  seeking  judicial
          review of this order pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil  Practice
          Law and Rules, and the tenant has credited no  such  amounts,  the
          tenant may file and enforce a certified copy of this  order  as  a
          judgment for the amount of $9,416.69  against  the  owner,  J.  K.
          Management Corporation. 

          ISSUED:





                                                                        
                                          ELLIOT SANDER
                                          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