Adm. Review Docket No: BE 410124-RT
                                 STATE OF NEW YORK
                           OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

        APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: BE 410124-RT  
             HENRY ARCHER,                     DRO DOCKET NO.: L-3110043-RT 

                              PETITIONER    : 

        On May 26, 1987, the above-named petitioner tenant filed a  Petition
        for Administrative Review against an order issued on May  13,  1987,
        by the Rent Administrator at the then 10 Columbus  Circle,  District
        Rent Office, concerning the housing accommodations known as 5  Tudor
        City  Place,  Apartment  431,  New  York,  New  York,  wherein   the
        Administrator, dismissed the tenant's fair market rent appeal.  

        The applicable law is Section 2522.3 of the Rent Stabilization Code.

        The issue in these proceedings is whether the Administrator's  order
        was correct.

        The tenant commenced this proceeding by  filing  a  rent  overcharge
        complaint and fair market rent appeal application on March 28,  1983
        alleging, in essence, that the rent charged to him on that date  was
        in excess of rent charged to a  similar  apartment  in  the  subject
        Copies of the  tenants  complaint  were  served  on  the  owner  who
        responded by submitting a complete rental history  for  the  subject
        On May 13, 1987, the Administrator issued  the  order  herein  under
        appeal dismissing the tenant's fair market rent appeal  based  on  a
        determination order under Docket  Number  TA  9069,  Opinion  Number
        5345, issued on January 7,  1982.   Therein,  the  Conciliation  and
        Appeals Board (CAB), the Division's predecessor  agency,  found  the
        fair market rent ($439.21) to be  in  excess  of  the  initial  rent
        charged  the  tenant  ($419.01),  and,  accordingly,  dismissed  the
        application as being without merit.

        The  petitioner  challenges  the  Administrator's  findings   herein
        arguing that the prior CAB opinion was stale, not decided correctly, 
        and unlawful, and should have  been  reconsidered.   The  petitioner
        also alleges that Division staff delayed and misled the tenant as to 
        the status of this application below and at PAR.

        The Commissioner notes that there  is  no  record  that  the  tenant
        sought judicial review of the CAB's fair market  rent  determination
        under Docket Number 9069.  The tenant's failure to appeal the  CAB's

        Adm. Review Docket No: BE 410124-RT
        initial determination that there was no merit to  the  initial  fair
        market rent application rendered that  administrative  determination
        final,  precluding  further  appeal  or   reconsideration   thereof.
        Consequently,  the   Administrator   properly   cited   that   prior
        determination to deny further consideration  in  the  May  13,  1987
        determination (L-3110043-R/T) herein under review.

        The Commissioner finds  no  evidence  to  support  the  petitioner's
        allegations of irregularity in a vital matter or lack of due process 
        or to support the petitioner's allegation  that  it  was  misled  by
        Division staff.

        Regarding the petitioner's request for a hearing,  the  Commissioner
        notes that the record was complete upon the written submissions  and
        that, therefore, a hearing was not warranted.

        The petitioner is correct that  the  Division  listed  an  incorrect
        address for the tenant in the notice confirming the receipt  of  the
        tenant's PAR.  However, as the Administrator's order issued prior to 
        the PAR notice, the subsequent inadvertant error on the  PAR  notice
        could not have had an impact  on  the  Administrator's  order.   The
        Commissioner takes note however of  the  petitioner's  objection  to
        require that Division records be  updated  to  reflect  the  correct
        information.  The Commissioner further notes that other than causing 
        temporary record keeping delays, the incorrect address  on  the  PAR
        notice constituted harmless error.

        THEREFORE,  in  accordance  with   the   provision   of   the   Rent
        Stabilization Law and Code, Chapter 403 of the  Law  and  1983,  and
        Chapter 403 of the Law of 1983, and Chapter 102 of the Laws of 1984, 
        it is

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


                                        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