STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO. BI110072RO
: DRO DOCKET NO.Q3121838R
GRENADIER REALTY CORP./ TENANT: LOUIS SILVERMAN
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 18, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
August 19, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New
York, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 260-
46 Langston Avenue, Queens, New York, Apartment No. 2, wherein the
Rent Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the
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
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 in February, 1984, by
the tenant's filing of a rent overcharge complaint. In answer to
the tenant's complaint, the owner submitted a complete rental
history as required.
In Order Number CDR 31,138, the Rent Administrator determined
that the tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $419.64 and
directed the owner to refund such overcharge to the tenant.
In this petition, the owner alleges in substance that it is not
the owner, but the managing agent and that the DHCR incorrectly
calculated the three year renewal lease under Guidelines 7 resulting
in an overcharge of $8.76 per month.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
Pursuant to Section 2520.6(i) of the Rent Stabilization Code,
an owner is defined in pertinent part as any person or entity
receiving or entitled to receive rent for the use or occupation of
any housing accommodation or an agent of any of the foregoing.
In the instant case, the petitioner herein, the managing agent
meets the above definition of an owner and it was proper for the
Rent Administrator to list it as an owner in the order under appeal
herein. However, this order is issued without prejudice to any
action the managing agent may have against the actual owner of the
subject premises for a refund of any overcharge received by said
The petitioner's contention that the amount of the Guideline 7
three year renewal increase was incorrectly determined is without
merit. The Rent Administrator correctly determined such increase to
be 12 1/2 percent over the prior rent of $184.00 or $207.00.
Accordingly, the Rent Administrator's order was warranted.
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
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, not in excess of twenty percent per month thereof of
the overcharge may be offset against any rent thereafter due the
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, denied, and, that the order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA