CC 110220-RO

                                  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.: CC 110220-RO

                                                 DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
               Umar Chaudry,                     DOCKET NO.: 54698

                                                 TENANT:   Fouad    Shaaban
                                     PETITIONER    
          ------------------------------------X 


            ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


          On March 23,  1988,  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against  an  order  issued  on
          March 11, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, 
          New York, New York, concerning the housing  accommodations  known
          as 99-21 43rd Avenue, Corona, New York, Apartment No. 6,  wherein
          the Rent Administrator determined that the owner had  overcharged
          the tenant.

          The Administrative Appeal is being  determined  pursuant  to  the
          provisions of Section 2528.2 of the Rent Stabilization 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 in January 1985  by  the
          filing of an objection to the 1984 apartment registration by  the
          tenant, alleging that the rent being paid was an overcharge,  and
          that the apartment registration form had not been received.   The
          tenant took occupancy on February 1, 1980 at a  monthly  rent  of
          $250.00.
               
          The owner was  requested  to  submit  proof  of  service  of  the
          apartment registration upon the tenant, and all leases from 
          April 1, 1980.  In response, the owner submitted leases  for  the
          following periods: February 1, 1980  through  January  31,  1981;
          February 1, 1984 through January 31, 1985; July 1,  1985  through
          June 30, 1986; July 1, 1986 through June 30, 1988.

          The owner also submitted an affidavit documenting the mailing  on
          May 19, 1984 of the 1984 apartment registration to the tenant  by
          the Rent Stabilization Association, along with the postal receipt 
          for that mailing, and the RSA mailing house addressee list.
           






          CC 110220-RO
          Under Docket Number 54698, the Rent Administrator determined that 
          the tenant had been  overcharged  in  the  amount  of  $4,655.81,
          including treble damages on overcharges  collected  on  or  after
          April 1, 1984, and directed the owner to refund  such  overcharge
          to the tenant.

          In this petition,  the  owner  contends  in  substance  that  the
          tenant's objection to registration  should  have  been  dismissed
          because the tenant failed to file it within 90 days  of  May  19,
          1984, the date of service of  the  apartment  registration.   The
          tenant did not respond to the petition.

          Pursuant  to   Sections   2522.3(c)(2),   2526.1(a)(2)(ii),   and
          2528.2(d) of the Rent Stabilization Code, a tenant  must  file  a
          challenge  to  the  initial  apartment  registration  (overcharge
          complaint or fair market rent appeal) within 90 days  of  service
          of the  registration  form  on  the  tenant  by  certified  mail.
          Section 2528.2(d) further provides that for registrations  served
          prior to the effective  date  of  that  section,  any  method  of
          service permitted by the DHCR at the time  of  service  shall  be
          deemed to have the same effect as service by certified mailing.

          The Division's instructions for service of the initial  apartment
          registration on  the  tenant  by  the  owner  provided  for  hand
          delivery of the envelope with signed receipt,  use  of  the  Post
          Office "Carrier Route Pre-Sort" Service through a bonded  mailing
          housing as evidenced by the Post Office date-certification of the 
          number of  pieces  received  from  the  mailing  house  for  each
          building and the mailing house addressee list  or  regular  first
          class mail documented by Post Office form #P.O. 3877.

          DHCR instructions further provided that the proof(s) of  receipt,
          properly signed and dated (by the tenant, the  post  office,  and
          the mailing house, as appropriate) would be  considered  adequate
          by the DHCR to establish the tenant's 90  day  challenge  period,
          which would begin on the date of receipt.

          To document the date of mailing of the apartment registration  to
          the  tenant,  the  owner  submitted  the  R.S.A.  mailing   house
          addressee list and the  postal  receipt  for  the  May  19,  1984
          mailing.  The Commissioner finds that the documentation  conforms
          to DHCR service  requirements  and  proves  the  mailing  of  the
          apartment registration to the tenant on May 19, 1984.

          The tenant's objection was dated by the tenant at the time of his 
          signature as January 11, 1985, and was date - stamped received by 
          the DHCR on January 14, 1985, more than  seven  months  following
          the mailing of the apartment registration to the  tenant  on  May
          19, 1984.  The Commissioner therefore  finds  that  the  tenant's
          objection was untimely filed.

          Inasmuch as the tenant's objection has been found to be untimely, 
          the other arguments raised by the owner in its petition are found 
          to be moot.

          If the owner has already complied with the  Rent  Administrator's
          order and there are arrears due to the owner as a result  of  the
          instant determination, the tenant is permitted  to  pay  off  the
          arrears in twenty four equal monthly installments.






          CC 110220-RO

          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,  granted,  that  the  order  of  the  Rent
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, revoked, and  that  the
          tenant's objection be, and  the  same  hereby  is,  dismissed  as
          untimely.

          ISSUED:


                                                                      
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Acting 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