BL610365RO
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 : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO. BL610365RO
: DRO DOCKET NO. 3208
Martin Shapiro TENANT: Sheila Boyce
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 26,1987, the above-named petitioner-owner timely
refiled a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued
on October 29,1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle,
New York,New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
3540 Decatur Avenue, Bronx, New York, Apartment No. 1E, wherein the
Rent Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the
tenant.
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of the Rent Stabilization Law and Code.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator's order was
warranted.
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 on
June 26, l984 of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant.
In response to the tenant's complaint, the owner stated in
substance that he had purchased the subject property in 1982 and he
had not received any leases earlier than the one commencing November
1980. The owner submitted a lease history from November 1, l980 and
a copy of the purchase contract.
In Order Number 3208, the Rent Administrator established the
legal stabilization rent at $354.07 effective January 1,1986 and
determined that due to the owner's failure to submit a complete
rental history, the owner had collected a rent overcharge of
$5,027.18 including interest on that portion of the overcharge
occurring on and after April 1, 1984.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the
order should be reversed because 1) the tenant's objection to the
BL610365RO
registration was untimely; 2) the owner did not know that prior to
1984, leases had to be saved; 3) the building was purchased in 1982
and the seller provided only current leases; 4) the rent computed by
the Administrator is not appropriate for the subject building which
is an elevator building constructed in or about 1970.
In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in
substance that the Rent Administrator's order should be upheld.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
Section 2526.1(a)(3)(ii)of the Rent Stabilization Code provides
in pertinent part that as to complaints filed within ninety days of
the initial registration, the legal regulated rent for purposes of
determining an overcharge shall be deemed to be the rent charged and
paid on April 1, 1980, the base rent date. Pursuant to Code Section
2523.7, every owner shall keep and make available for inspection,
rent records from the applicable base date, in the instant case,
April 1, 1980.
The owner has not provided a complete rental history. That the
owner did not purchase the subject property until 1982 does not
excuse his failure to do so. Further the record shows that the
tenant received the apartment registration form from the owner on
April 16, 1984 and filed the objrction on June 26, 1984-within the
ninety day period for timely filing. Accordingly, the Rent
Administrator's order establishing the lawful stabilization rent
utilizing the default procedures and finding a rent overcharge
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
increases.
The Commissioner has determined in this Order and Opinion that
the owner collected overcharges of $$5,027.18. This Order may, upon
expiration of the period for seeking review of this Order and
Opinion pursuant to Article Seventy-eight of the Civil Practice Law
and Rules, be filed and enforced as a judgment or not in excess of
twenty percent per month of the overcharge may be offset against any
rent thereafter due the owner. Where the tenant credits the
overcharge, the tenant may add to the overcharge, or where the
tenant files this Order as a judgment, the County Clerk may add to
the overcharge, interest at the rate payable on ajudgment pursuant
to section 5004 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules from the
issuance date of th Rent Administrator's order to the issuance date
of the Commissioner's Order.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
BL610365RO
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.
ISSUED
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
