BL 610081-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 610081-RO
       724 E. 216TH STREET CORP.,
 c/o   ANTHONY TESTAMARK,               DISTRICT RENT
                                        ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                        NO.:
                        PETITIONER      T/C 075903-G
----------------------------------x


  ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                
                                
On  December 14, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner  filed  a
Petition for Administrative Review of an order issued on November
12, 1987, by the District Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle,
New York, New York, concerning the housing accommodation known as
Apartment  1-D,  724 East 216th Street, Bronx,  New  York  10467,
wherein the District Administrator determined that the tenant had
been overcharged.

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 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 April 1, 1982  and
expiring March 31, 1983 at a monthly rent of $350.00.

The  owner  was served with a copy of the complaint and  was  re-
quested  to  submit rent records to prove the lawfulness  of  the
rent being charged.  The owner did not interpose an answer.

In the order under appeal herein, the District Rent Administrator
established   the  lawful  stabilized  rent  using  the   default
procedure  based  on the owner's failure to submit  the  required
rent  records,  set the lawful stabilized rent at $319.50  as  of
October

1,  1985  through  September 30, 1987 and  ordered  a  refund  of
charges  in the amount of $5,311.89, including treble damages  on
overcharges collected on or after April 1, 1984.

In  its  petition,  the  owner contends that  the  District  Rent
Admin-istrator's  order is incorrect and should  be  revoked  and
asserts  that there has been no overcharge and that the owner  is
in com-pliance with all requests.

In  answer to the petition the tenant responds that she  believes
she  was  overcharged because the owner refused  to  give  her  a
rental history.

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

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  sub-
ject to rent stabilization, if later) to date and to produce such
records to the DHCR upon remand.

The  evidence  of  record indicates that  the  agency's  notices,
properly addressed to the owner and sent by certified mail,  were
returned  unclaimed.  The Commissioner therefore finds  that  the
Administrator  properly established the rent  using  the  default
procedure.

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

The total amount of overcharge is $5,311.89.  This order may upon
the expiration of the period in which the owner may insti-tute  a
proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice  Law  and
Rules, be filed and enforced in the same manner as a judgement.

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.

ISSUED:


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