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





    

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