BF210393RO
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. BF210393RO
: DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
Jacob Weinreb Mgmt., DOCKET NO. K3102083R
72 Unit Company, CDR30,337
TENANT: Jacob Barenholtz
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
AND MODIFYING RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
On June 13, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against an order issued on May 26, 1987, by the
Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, New York, concerning
the housing accommodations known as 514 Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn,
New York, Apartment No. 3C, wherein the Rent Administrator determined
that the owner had overcharged the tenant.
On September 16, 1992, the Commissioner denied the owner's petition
based on the owner's failure to comply with the Commissioner's directive
to submit documentation that the current owner (72 Unit Company) and the
prior owner (72 Unit Co.) were discrete entities.
On October 1, 1992, the Commissioner reopened the proceeding to consider
the owner's submission in response to the DHCR directive which although
received timely did not reach the docket until after the issuance of the
Commissioner's September 16, 1992 order denying the owner's petition.
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the provisions
of Section 2526.1 of the 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 in March 1984 of
a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant.
In response to the tenant's complaint, the current owner stated in
substance that it was not given leases prior to June 1980 by the prior
owner; the base date was June 30, 1974; that 72 Unit Company purchased
the subject building on May 1, 1984 and submitted a rental history from
June 1, 1980.
In Order Number CDR30,337, the Rent Administrator determined that due to
the owner's failure to submit a complete rental history, the owner had
BF210393RO
collected a rent overcharge of $4,779.18 including interest on that
portion of the overcharge occurring on and after April 1, 1984 and
naming only Jacob Weinreb Management as the owner.
In this petition, the current owner contends in substance that the Rent
Administrator's order should be modified to indicate that the current
owner purchased the subject building in May 1984 and in the absence of
evidence of collusion the current owner's obligation should be limited
to the rent actually collected by the current owner.
In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in substance that
the owner's argument was not in accordance with the Rent Stabilization
Law or court opinions and the order should be sustained.
During the appeal, the DHCR directed the current owner's agent (Jacob
Weinreb Mgmt.) to submit documentation substantiating the transfer of
title from 72 Unit Co. to 72 Unit Company and the date Weinreb Mgmt.
first became Managing agents for the subject building in order to
ascertain whether the two owners were discrete corporate entities and
when such transfer took place.
The current owner responded to the directive by submitting copies of a
deed executed April 30, 1984 transferring title from 72 Unit Co to 72
Unit Company; a certified partnership certificate for 72 Unit Company
indicating the partners to be Wolf Weinreb, Sara Weinreb, Leon Weinreb,
Sabina Weinreb, Abraham Reiss, Marie Reiss, Jacob Weinreb and Isabell
Wassner as of March 26, 1984 and a certified partnership certificate for
72 Unit Co indicating the partners to be Henry Jacob Tenenbaum, and
Natalia and Jack Twersky as of November 22, 1983. Further, the current
owner stated in correspondence that Weinreb Management first became the
managing agent upon title transfer on April 30, 1984.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be granted.
Section 2526.1(f) of the Rent Stabilization Code provides in pertinent
part that for overcharges collected prior to April 1, 1984, an owner
will be held responsible only for his or her portion of the overcharge,
in the absence of collusion or any relationship between such owner and
any prior owners, and that for overcharge complaints filed or
overcharges collected on or after April 1, 1984, a current owner shall
be responsible for all overcharge penalties, including penalties
collected by any prior owner.
An examination of the record in this case discloses that the tenant
listed the owner on the complaint in March 1984 as "72 Unit Corp." and
that the prior owner was served under that name with the tenant's
complaint; that the complaint was responded to in October 1984 and
November 1984 by the current owner's agent (Jacob Weinreb); that in the
owner's response dated February 17, 1987, the current owner's agent
first indicated that it represented the new owner 72 Unit Company which
purchased the subject building on May 1, 1984; that the documents
submitted by the owner substantiate the transfer of title as the owner
alleged in it's petition and that the 1984 registration data for the
subject building indicated that the owner was Weinreb Management and
that there is no evidence of collusion or any relationship between the
present owner and any prior owner. Pursuant to Section 2526.1(f), the
current owner is liable for all overcharges collected from April 1, 1984
through May 31, 1987 including interest and excess security - that is
BF210393RO
$1780.96.
The Commissioner notes that the prior owner was served with a copy of
the tenant's complaint but not listed in the Rent Administrator's order.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant's rights, if any,
to proceed against the prior owner in a court of competent jurisdiction
and without prejudice to any action the current owner may have against
the former owner as to the rent overcharges collected by the former
owner.
The owner is directed to reflect the findings and determinations made in
this order on all future registration statements, including those for
the current year if not already filed, citing this order as the basis
for the change. Registration statements already on file, however,
should not be amended to reflect the findings and determinations made in
this order. The owner is further directed to adjust subsequent rents to
an amount no greater than that determined by this order plus any lawful
increases.
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 or not
in excess of twenty percent per month thereof may be offset against any
rent thereafter due the owner.
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, granted and, that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and
the same hereby is, modified to show that the amount of overcharge owed
by the current owner (Jacob Weinreb Management, 72 Unit Company) is
$1,780.96.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
