ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO
                                  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   S.J.R. NO. 7311
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NOS. 
                                                  BK410336RO and 
               CEDAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,      HK420130RO
               VESEY REALTY COMPANY, AND          
               CASTEGA REALTY,                    DISTRICT RENT 
                              PETITIONERS         ADMINISTRATOR'S 
                                                  DOCKET NOS.
          ------------------------------------X   AB410256R and
                                                  EG420485R

                                                  TENANTS: JERRY BENNETT
                                                                                                    and LEO DMITRI
                                          
           ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                       IN PART

               On November 12, 1987, the above-named landlord, the Vesey 
          Realty Company, filed a petition for administrative review, under 
          Docket No. BK410336RO, of an order issued on October 16, 1987 by 
          the Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation known 
          as Apartment 6C, 60 West 10th Street, New York, New York.  On 
          November 3, 1993, the above-named landlords filed a petition for 
          administrative review, under Docket No. HK420130RO, of an order 
          issued on October 8, 1993 by the Rent Administrator concerning the 
          above-mentioned housing accommodation.

               Subsequently, the subject landlords filed a petition in the 
          Supreme Court, in the nature of an application for a writ of 
          mandamus, requesting that a determination of the administrative 
          appeal, under Docket No. BK410336RO, be issued.

               Furthermore, after more than ninety days had elapsed from the  
          time they filed their petition for administrative review, under 
          Docket No. HK420130RO, the landlords deemed the above-mentioned 
          petition as having been denied, and sought judicial review in the 
          Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and 
          Rules.



















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

               Pursuant to a stipulation of settlement entered into by the 
          parties to the aforementioned court proceedings, the parties agreed 
          to remit the two administrative appeals to the Division of Housing 
          and Community Renewal (D.H.C.R.) for further consideration, and 
          that they agreed that D.H.C.R. would consolidate the two above- 
          mentioned petitions for administrative review.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner deems it appropriate to 
          consolidate the proceedings for disposition herein.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issues raised by the petitions for administrative 
          review.

               The proceedings were commenced by the subject tenants filing 
          overcharge complaints, dated February 3, 1986 and July 24, 1990, 
          respectively.

               In the order under review herein, under Docket No. AB410256R, 
          the Administrator established the subject apartment's maximum rents 
          as follows:  $273.31 per month effective January 1, 1984, $293.81 
          per month effective January 1, 1985, $315.85 per month effective 
          January 1, 1986, and $339.54 per month effective January 1, 1987.

               In the order under review herein, under Docket No. EG420485R, 
          the Administrator established the subject apartment's maximum rent 
          as follows: $386.24 per month effective January 1, 1990, $415.21 
          per month effective January 1, 1991, $446.35 per month effective 
          January 1, 1992, and $479.83 per month effective January 1, 1993.

               In the landlord's petition, filed under Docket No. BK410336RO, 
          the landlord asserts, among other things, that the calculation of 
          the maximum rents in Docket No. AB410256R were incorrect; that the 
          rent agency issued an order on October 25, 1967 which increased the 
          subject apartment's maximum rent by $13.38 per month for 
          subletting; that the subject apartment was being subletted in 1968; 
          that the subject apartment is presently being subletted; and that 
          the maximum rent on January 1, 1972 was $164.71 per month.

               To its petition the landlord attaches, among other things, a 
          copy of an order issued on October 25, 1967, under Docket No. 
          2AM3501, which increased the subject apartment's maximum rent from 
          $133.82 per month to $147.20 per month based on the condition that 
          the subject tenant sublets the subject apartment.





               In their answer the tenants assert, among other things, that 
          one of the tenants, Jerry Bennett, entered into a lease with the 






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

          building's prior landlord on April 28, 1967; that the other tenant 
          "Leo Dimitri is the roommate of Jerry Bennett and a rent controlled 
          tenant" as he has resided in the subject apartment since prior to 
          June 30, 1971, and that the tenant has not subletted the apartment.

               To their answer the tenants attach, among other things, a copy 
          of the above-mentioned lease commencing on June 1, 1967 and 
          expiring on May 31, 1969 at a rent of $147.20 per month.  In the 
          lease a rider was included which stated that:  "In consideration of 
          the new rent, the landlord gives the tenant the right to share the 
          apartment with one co-occupant."

               In their petition, filed under Docket No. HK420130RO, the 
          subject landlords assert, among other things, that the calculations 
          of the subject apartment's maximum rents in the order issued under 
          Docket No. EG420485R is inconsistent with the Administrator's 
          determination in the order issued under Docket No. AB410256R; that 
          the subject apartment's maximum rent should have been increased 
          annually by 10%, in addition to the annual 7.5% statutory increase, 
          based on a sublet allowance allegedly provided for in the 
          aforementioned rent agency's order issued on October 25, 1967 under 
          Docket No. 2AM3501; that the above-mentioned order which increased 
          the subject apartment's maximum rent from $133.82 per month to 
          $147.20 per month was ignored by the Administrator in calculating 
          the rent; that on April 25, 1974 the rent agency issued an order 
          which reduced the subject apartment's maximum rent by $37.50 per 
          month based on a finding of a reduction in services; that on August 
          21, 1975 the rent agency issued an order which modified the 
          aforementioned order issued on April 25, 1974 by reducing the 
          maximum rent by $31.29 per month effective on April 25, 1974; that 
          in the orders under review herein, the Administrator improperly 
          reduced the maximum rent by $31.29 per month and $37.50 per month, 
          and that the maximum rent should have only been reduced by $31.29 
          per month pursuant to the order issued on August 21, 1975.  

               In their answer, dated January 14, 1994, the subject tenants 
          assert, among other things, that Jerry Bennett and Leo Dmitri have 
          occupied the subject apartment since 1964 to the present as co- 
          tenants; that the subject apartment has never been subletted,and 
          that in an application for a "Compensatory Rent and Labor Cost 
          Adjustment" filed with the rent agency the landlord noted that the 
          subject apartment's rent as of July, 1970 was $148.67 per month.






               To its answer the tenants attach, among other things, a copy 
          of the landlord's application for a "Compensatory Rent and Labor 
          Cost Adjustment" dated August 25, 1970.  In the aforementioned 
          application the landlord calculated the subject apartment's 












          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

          collectible rent as $153.22 per month effective August 1, 1970, 
          pursuant to former Section 23 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations.

               After careful consideration, the Commissioner finds that the 
          petitions for administrative review should be granted in part.

               The Commissioner notes that the tenant, Jerry Bennett, on 
          April 28, 1967 entered into a lease with the subject building's 
          prior landlord commencing on June 1, 1967 and expiring on May 31, 
          1969 at a rent of $147.20.  As previously noted, the above- 
          mentioned lease contained a rider which stated that:  "In 
          consideration of the new rent, the landlord gives the tenant the 
          right to share the apartment with one co-occupant."

               Based upon the above-mentioned lease, the Commissioner finds 
          that the landlord is not entitled to any additional rent increases 
          solely based on the tenant, Jerry Bennett, sharing the subject 
          apartment with Leo Dmitri.

               The Commissioner notes that the aforementioned order issued on 
          October 25, 1967 under Docket No. 2AM3501 also increased the 
          subject apartment's maximum rent to $147.20 per month based upon 
          "the privilege of subletting."

               Even if, as the landlords assert, the facts in this proceeding 
          warrant a finding that the subject apartment were subletted, the 
          Commissioner finds that the subject landlord would only be entitled 
          to increase the subject apartment's maximum rent from $133.82 per 
          month to $147.20 per month effective October 25, 1967; and that the 
          landlord would not be entitled to any further increases in the 
          maximum rent based on subletting, pursuant to former Section 33.3 
          of the Rent and Eviction Regulations.

               Based on the record, the Commissioner points out that 
          adjustments to the subject apartment's maximum rent after October 
          25, 1967 were based on the figure of $147.20 per month.

               Pursuant to former Section 23 of the Rent and Eviction 
          Regulations, the record reflects that the subject apartment's 
          maximum rent was increased to $153.22 per month effective on August 
          1, 1970.  The record further reflects that on December 31, 1971 the 
          subject apartment's maximum rent remained at $153.22 per month.




               The record reflects that the rent agency calculated the 
          subject apartment's maximum base rent (M.B.R.) at $213.36 per month 
          effective January 1, 1972.

               Pursuant to the applicable rent regulations and laws, the 
          subject apartment's maximum rent effective January 1, 1972 was 






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

          calculated by increasing the maximum rent effective December 31, 
          1971 by 7.5%.

               Accordingly, the subject apartment's maximum rent effective 
          January 1, 1972 should be $164.71 per month ($153.22 X 7.5%).  

               Pursuant to subsequent increases and adjustments to the 
          maximum rent, the Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's 
          maximum rent effective January 1, 1974 should be $186.88 per month.

               The record reflects that the rent agency issued an order on 
          August 21, 1975 under Docket Nos. 2R87307-2R87333 which modified an 
          earlier order of the rent agency by reducing the subject 
          apartment's maximum rent by $31.29 per month effective April 25, 
          1974, based on an Administrator's finding of a reduction in 
          services.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the subject 
          apartment's maximum rent effective April 25, 1974 should be $155.59 
          per month ($186.88-$31.29).

               Based upon the 7.5% statutory increase, the Commissioner finds 
          that the subject apartment's maximum rent effective January 1, 1975 
          should be $167.26 ($155.59 X 7.5%).

               The record reflects that the rent agency issued an order on 
          December 15, 1975 under Docket No. 2AC378572 which increased the 
          subject apartment's maximum rent by $4.00 per month for the 
          installation of new equipment.  Accordingly, the Commissioner finds 
          that the subject apartment's maximum rent effective on December 15, 
          1975 should be $171.26 per month ($167.26+$4.00).

               Based on subsequent M.B.R. orders of eligibility and 
          subsequent orders issued by the rent agency adjusting the maximum 
          rent, the Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's maximum 
          rent effective January 1, 1983 should be $321.94 per month, and 
          that the subject apartment's M.B.R. with adjustments should be 
          $361.11 per month effective January 1, 1983.






               The record reflects that the rent agency issued an order on 
          August 22, 1984 under Docket No. 6M4791 which, among other things, 
          recalculated the subject apartment's M.B.R. at $325.72 per month 
          effective January 1, 1984.  Based on previous adjustments to the 
          maximum rent, the Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's 
          M.B.R. with adjustments should be $310.94 per month effective 
          January 1, 1984, and that the M.B.R. with adjustments should remain 
          at $310.94 per month effective January 1, 1985.












          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO


               As a result of the above-mentioned order, the subject 
          apartment's January 1, 1983 maximum rent exceeded the subject 
          apartment's 1984-1985 M.B.R. with adjustments.  Pursuant to Section 
          2201.6(b) of the City Rent and Eviction Regulations, the 
          Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's maximum rent 
          effective January 1, 1983 remains in effect until the M.B.R. equals 
          or exceeds the January 1, 1983 maximum rent.  Accordingly, the 
          Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's maximum rent 
          effective January 1, 1984 and January 1, 1985 should remain at 
          $321.94 per month.

               Pursuant to the 1986-1987 M.B.R. order of eligibility, the 
          Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's 1986-1987 M.B.R. 
          with adjustments should be $348.40 per month.

               Based upon the 7.5% statutory increase, the Commissioner finds 
          that the subject apartment's maximum rent effective January 1, 1986 
          should be $346.09 per month ($321.94 X 7.5%).

               As the subject apartment's maximum rent can not exceed the 
          subject apartment's M.B.R., the Commissioner finds that the subject 
          apartment's maximum rent effective January 1, 1987 should be 
          $348.40 per month.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator's 
          order under review herein, issued under Docket No. AB410256R, 
          should be modified as follows:

                    Effective Date                Maximum Rent

                    January 1, 1984                $321.94 per month
                    January 1, 1985                $321.94 per month
                    January 1, 1986                $346.09 per month
                    January 1, 1987                $348.40 per month

               Based on the 7.5% statutory increase, the Commissioner finds 
          that the subject apartment's maximum rent effective January 1, 1988 
          should be $374.53 per month, and the subject apartment's maximum 
          rent effective January 1, 1989 should be $402.62 per month.
               

               The record reflects that the rent agency issued an order on 
          February 22, 1991 under Docket No. EG420012BO which recalculated 
          the subject apartment's M.B.R. effective January 1, 1990 at $667.25 
          per month.  The Commissioner finds that the subject apartment's 
          1990-1991 M.B.R. with adjustments should be $652.47 per month.

               Based on the 7.5% statutory increase, the Commissioner finds 
          that the Administrator's order under review herein under Docket No. 
          EG420485R should be modified as follows:







          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

                    Effective Date                Maximum Rent

                    January 1, 1990               $432.82 per month
                    January 1, 1991               $465.28 per month
                    January 1, 1992               $500.18 per month
                    January 1, 1993               $537.69 per month

               The Commissioner points out that the maximum rents noted in 
          this order and opinion do not include any fuel cost adjustments 
          which the subject landlord may be entitled to collect.

               If the subject tenants are owed money resulting from this 
          order and opinion, the Commissioner notes that the subject tenants 
          may bring an action against the landlord or landlords in any court 
          of competent jurisdiction, pursuant to Section 2206.8(a)(2) of the 
          City Rent and Eviction Regulations, within one year after the 
          landlord or landlords fail to pay any refund which is owed to the 
          tenants.  The one-year time period is to be calculated from when 
          the order becomes final.  If there is no Article 78 petition of 
          this order, then the time period is one year after this order 
          becomes final.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the City Rent and Rehabilitation 
          Law and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is 

               ORDERED, that the petitions filed under Docket Nos. BK410336RO 
          and HK420130RO be, and the same hereby are, granted in part, and 
          that the Administrator's orders issued under Docket Nos. AB410256R 
          and EG420485R be, and the same hereby are, modified in accordance 
          with this order and opinion; and it is

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the subject apartment's maximum rent 
          shall be as follows:  $321.94 per month effective January 1, 1984, 
          $321.94 per month effective January 1, 1985, $346.09 per month 
          effective January 1, 1986, $348.40 per month effective January 1, 
          1987, $374.53 per month effective January 1, 1988, $402.62 per 




          month effective January 1, 1989, $432.82 per month effective 
          January 1, 1990, $465.28 per month effective January 1, 1991, 
          $500.18 per month effective January 1, 1992, and $537.69 per month 
          effective January 1, 1993; and it is 

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the subject tenants may pay any 
          retroactive rent arising as a result of this order and opinion in 
          one or more lump sum payments or, at the tenants' option, in equal 
          monthly installments equal in number to the number of months 
          between January 1, 1984 and the date of issuance of this order; and 
          it is 













          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. BK410336RO and HK420130RO

               FURTHER ORDERED, that if the subject tenants vacate after the 
          issuance of this order and opinion, such retroactive rents, if any, 
          shall be due immediately.

          NOTE:  Since there has been a change in the subject building's 
          ownership during the pendency of this matter, and that both 
          landlords have filed a petition for administrative review, it is 
          not clear if the current landlord is entitled to the full amount in 
          arrears, if any.  Accordingly, the former and current landlords 
          should inform the subject tenants within thirty days of the 
          issuance date of this order what amount or amounts of arrears, if 
          any, they are claiming.  Any dispute between the landlords, if any, 
          may have to be settled in a court of competent jurisdiction.

          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