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 
          APPEAL OF                               ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                                  DOCKET NO:BK210210RO
                    Surat Realty Corp             D.R.O. DOCKET 
                                                  NO: AA-200357-R
                                                  Tenant: Emily Taylor

                                   PETITIONER
          --------------------------------------x
           
          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On November 5, 1987, the above-named petitioner filed a  Petition
          for Administrative Review against an order issued on  October  1,
          1987 by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, 
          New York  concerning  the  housing  accommodation  known  as  400
          Herkimer Street, Apartment 6x, Brooklyn,  New  York  wherein  the
          Administrator determined that an overcharge  had  been  collected
          and directed the refund of $96.32 inclusive  of  excess  security
          and interest on the overcharge occurring on  or  after  April  1,
          1984.  

          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 in the administrative appeal. 

          The tenant commenced this proceeding or January 7, 1986 by filing 
          a complaint of rent  overcharge,  alleging  that  the  owner  had
          unlawfully increased the garage rental fee.  The tenant submitted 
          a full rental history from  October  1,  1970.   A  copy  of  the
          complaint was served on the owner on January 30, 1986.

          Although afforded the opportunity to do so,  the  owner  did  not
          respond.

          In the order here under review, the Administrator determined that 
          the rent being charged  for  the  subject  garage  space  was  an
          overcharge and directed the owner to roll back the  rent  and  to
          refund overcharges of $96.32, inclusive of  excess  security  and
          interest on the overcharge.
          Docket No. BK210210RO

          In   its   appeal,   the   owner   contends,   without    further
          specification, that the order should  be  revoked  as  arbitrary,
          erroneous and violative of due process of law.







          The tenant did not respond to the petition although afforded  the
          opportunity to do so.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should  be
          denied.

          Code Section 2520.6 (r)(4)(xi) provides in pertinent part:

               "Where... on  the  applicable  base  date  or  at  any  time
               subsequent thereto, there is or was a separate  charge,  and
               there is or was common ownership,  directly  or  indirectly,
               between the operator of such service and the owner,  or  the
               service was provided by the owner, any increase, other  than
               the charge provided in the initial agreement with  a  tenant
               to lease, rent or pay for such service, shall conform to the 
               applicable rent guidelines rate."

          Based on the uncontroverted evidence submitted by the tenant, the 
          Administrator correctly determined that the garage  space  rented
          by the tenant was subject to  the  Rent  Stabilization  Code  and
          pursuant  thereto  found  that  the  owner   had   collected   an
          overcharge.  The Commissioner notes  that  the  owner  failed  to
          respond in the proceeding below  and  even  in  this  appeal  has
          failed to specify facts or law  which  render  the  determination
          arbitrary and capricious or which violate due process.

          Upon the  expiration  of  the  period  in  which  the  owner  may
          institute a proceeding pursuant to Article Seventy-Eight  of  the
          Civil Practice Law and Rules, the tenant may credit no more  than
          20% of the overcharge each month until the  overcharge  is  fully
          credited.

          Therefore, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, it is 

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same  hereby  is,  denied
          and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby  is,
          affirmed.

          ISSUED:   


                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                             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