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.BJ230305RO
: DRO DOCKET NO.36529
ZEAL MANAGEMENT CORP. TENANT:NAFTALI TOPPER
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On October 8, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner timely
refiled a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued
on February 11, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle,
New York, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
1580 East 18th Street, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment No. 5J, wherein
the Rent Administrator determined that a rent overcharge had
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 by the tenant's filing
of an Objection to the Registration in November 1984 in which the
tenant stated that there was a rent overcharge.
In response to the tenant's complaint, the owner stated that it
had purchased the subject premises in June, 1985, and submitted a
rental history for the subject apartment.
In Order Number 36529, the Rent Administrator determined that
the owner had collected a rent overcharge totalling $297.12 from
February 1, 1982 through January 31, 1987, and directed the owner to
refund such overcharge to the tenant.
In this petition, the owner alleges in substance that it should
not be liable for refunding any overcharge which occurred prior to
its ownership of the subject premises since it did not collect such
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
Section 2526.1(f)(2) of the Rent Stabilization Code provides in
pertinent part 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 based
upon overcharges collected by any prior owner.
In the instant case, the tenant's overcharge complaint was
filed after April 1, 1984. Accordingly, the Rent Administrator
correctly held that the current owner was responsible for the refund
of the entire overcharge. However, this order is issued without
prejudice to any action the current owner may have against the prior
owner for the refund of any overcharge actually collected by the
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 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.
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