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. BJ630303RO
: DRO DOCKET NO. B3100272R
STEVEN FINKELSTEIN TENANT: MINNIE AGEDA
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On October 5, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner timely
refiled a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued
on July 27, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New
York, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 1571
Sheridan Avenue, Bronx, New York, Apartment No. 34B wherein the Rent
Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the tenant.
The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was filed prior to
April 1, 1984. Sections 2526.1 (a) (4) and 2521.1 (d) of the Rent
Stabilization Code (effective May 1, 1987) governing rent overcharge
and fair market rent proceedings provide that determination of these
matters be based upon the law or code provisions in effect on March
31, 1984. Therefore, unless otherwise indicated, reference to
Sections of the Rent Stabilization Code (Code) contained herein are
to the Code in effect on April 30, 1987.
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of Section 42A of the former 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 filing in
March, 1984, of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant. The
owner was directed to submit a complete rental history of the
subject apartment. It is noted that the tenant who had occupied the
subject apartment since January, 1973, submitted a rental history
from that date.
In response to the tenant's complaint and the directive to
submit a rental history, the owner stated in substance that the
BJ 630303 RO
tenant's rent had been set pending the outcome of the Bryant Avenue
Tenants' Association's law suit so that it was not necessary for the
owner to submit a rental history.
In Order Number CDR 40,030, the Rent Administrator determined
that due to the owner's failure to submit a complete rental history,
the rental history submitted by the tenant would be used and based
on such rental history determined that the owner had collected a
rent overcharge of $9,298.95 including interest on that portion of
the overcharge occurring on and after April 1, 1984.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that after
receiving his answer regarding the Bryant Avenue case, the Rent
Administrator should have informed him of the necessity to submit a
rental history and he would have done so.
In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in
substance that the Rent Administrator's order was warranted.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
Section 42A of the former Rent Stabilization Code requires that
an owner retain complete records for each stabilized apartment in
effect from June 30, 1974 to date and produce them to the DHCR upon
demand. If the apartment was decontrolled from the Rent Control Law
after June 30, 1974, the owner must provide satisfactory documentary
evidence of the apartment's date of decontrol and submit a rental
history from that date.
In the instant case, the owner has not provided a complete
rental history as mandated by Section 42A although given an adequate
opportunity to do so. Further the owner did not submit any rental
history along with his petition. The fact that the Bryant Avenue
lawsuit was pending does not excuse the failure to submit a rental
history since that lawsuit involved a determination of whether
tenants had to pay major capital improvement rent increases and did
not serve to stay rent overcharge proceedings. Further it is noted
that in the determination of rent overcharge appealed herein, the
owner was credited with the major capital improvement rent increase
to which it was entitled. Accordingly, the Rent Administrator
properly determined a rent overcharge based on the rental history
submitted by the tenant.
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
BJ 630303 RO
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, denied, and, that the order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA