CC 110275-RO

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433

          ----------------------------------x     S.J.R. 5951
          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.:   
                                                       CC 110275-RO
              KEY AND GEE ASSOCIATES,                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S 
                                                       DOCKET NOS.: 
                                                       TC 074355-G
                                   PETITIONER          BL 110056-RP
          ----------------------------------x     TENANT: Evan Davey   

          On March 7, 1988, the above-named  owner  filed  a  Petition  for
          Administrative Review against an order  issued  on  February  11,
          1988, by a Rent Administrator concerning  housing  accommodations
          known as Apartment 7-E, 138-70 Elder Avenue, Flushing, New  York,
          wherein the Administrator determined that  the  tenant  had  been

          Subsequent thereto, the subject-tenant filed a  petition  in  the
          Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the  Civil  Practice  Law
          and Rules in the nature of a mandamus proceeding.

          On November 6, 1991, an order was issued by Justice Santucci from 
          the Supreme Court of New York State, Queens County, remitting the 
          proceeding to the Division for a  determination  of  the  owner's
          administrative appeal within 90 days.

          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 administrative appeal.

          This proceeding was originally commenced on August  22,  1983  by
          the filing by the tenant of a complaint of rent overcharge.   The
          owner was served with the complaint and  requested  to  submit  a
          complete lease history. The owner  failed  to  comply  with  this

          On June 16, 1986, the Rent Administrator issued  an  order  under
          Docket No. TC 074355-G, wherein it was determined that the tenant 
          had been overcharged in the amount  of  $9,957.53  and  that  the
          lawful stabilized rent on the date of issuance  was  $362.58,  in
          accordance with a two-year lease term commencing on July 1, 1984. 
          The order stated that the owner had failed to submit  a  complete
          lease history.  The rent history  was  determined  in  accordance
          with default procedures established pursuant to Section  42-A  of
          the former Rent Stabilization Code.

          CC 110275-RO

          The owner filed a petition  for  administrative  review  of  this
          order on July 7, 1986, contending therein that the computation of 
          the refund was wrong since the Administrator did not account  for
          a three-month rent abatement which the tenant received as part of 
          a stipulation agreement with the owner, and that  the  order  did
          not accurately state the actual rents charged the tenants.

          On March 11, 1987, the Commissioner issued an order  and  opinion
          under Docket No. ARL 11408-Q granting  the  owner's  petition  in
          such part as credited the abatement  of  three  months  rent  for
          July, August, and  September,  1984.   As  based  on  the  lawful
          stabilized rent of $362.58 per month, a total  of  $1,087.74  was
          deducted from the amount of overcharges in the petitioned  order,
          reducing the total overcharge to $7,194.48.  The  June  25,  1984
          stipulation agreement was ruled void  and  without  effect.   The
          administrative order was affirmed in all other respects.

          Subsequently, on January 13, 1988,  a  Notice  of  Proceeding  to
          Reconsider Order Pursuant to  Remand  was  sent  to  the  parties
          wherein it was announced that the proceeding was  being  reopened
          in accordance with the Order of Remand issued on March 11,  1987.
          The notice also stated that the administrative  order  was  being
          modified to reflect the actual rents collected by the  owner  and
          to  recompute  the  total  overcharge  owed  to  the  tenant.   A
          statement informing the parties that  they  had  20  days  within
          which to submit an answer, and additional  evidence  if  desired,
          appeared on the bottom portion of the notice.

          On February 4, 1988, the owner submitted an answer  to  the  DHCR
          which included a lease history dating to 1973.

          On February 11, 1988, the Division issued an amended order  under
          Docket  No.  BL  110056-RP/TC   074355-G,   wherein   the   total
          overcharges  were  reduced  from  $9,957.53  to   $7,194.48,   in
          accordance with the Commissioner's order and opinion dated  March
          11, 1987.  This order included a rent  calculations  chart  which
          reflected the reduced overcharge amount, but  was  in  all  other
          respects identical to the charts in the original  order  and  the
          Commissioner's order and opinion.

          In its petition, the  owner  contends  that  the  new  order  was
          improper because the Rent Administrator ignored the complete rent 
          history that it had submitted in response to the Notice of Pro-
          ceeding to Reconsider and, secondly,  that  the  amount  of  rent
          credited to the tenant's account for July, August, and September, 
          1984, was actually $1,425.00 instead of $1,087.00, in  accordance
          with the aforementioned stipulation agreement. Enclosed with  the
          petition was the alleged  stipulation  agreement  and  the  lease
          history for the subject-premises extending back to 1973.

          The tenant responded  that  the  owner  should  not  be  afforded
          another opportunity to appeal those issues since they had already 
          been reviewed in the Commissioner's order and opinion dated March 
          11, 1987.  Furthermore, since the lawful rent of $362.58 had been 
          affirmed by the  Commissioner,  the  owner  should  only  receive
          credit for three months rent based on that amount,  and  not  the
          incorrect higher  amount  that  was  in  the  voided  stipulation

          CC 110275-RO

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of  the  opinion
          that the owner's petition should be denied  and  that  the  order
          under review - BL 110056-RP, issued on February 11, 1988 - should 
          be revoked.

          The Commissioner notes that the order and opinion dated March 11, 
          1987 had granted the owner's petition in such  part  as  deducted
          the lawful rent for July, August and  September,  1984  from  the
          total overcharges.  The administrator's order had been  affirmed,
          however, in all other respects, including  the  determination  of
          the lawful rent as $362.58.  The Commissioner's order and opinion 
          is clearly a final determination and  does  not  order  the  Rent
          Administrator to make any  further  determinations  or  direct  a
          remand of the proceeding.

          Therefore, the owner's failure  to  timely  commence  a  judicial
          review proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of  the  Civil  Practice
          Law and Rules precludes  any  further  appellate  review  of  the
          issues in the Commissioner's order.

          The Commissioner further notes that, although the  Commissioner's
          order and opinion of March  11,  1987  had  granted  the  owner's
          petition in part by reducing the amount of overcharges, the order 
          was a final one in accordance with Section  2529.8  of  the  Rent
          Stabilization Code in that none of the issues  contained  therein
          were remanded for any further action by the rent administrator.

          As such, the Commissioner herein rules that the amended order  of
          February 11, 1988 is void  and  must  be  revoked,  and  that  an
          appellate review of the issues contained  therein is barred under 
          the doctrine of res judicata.

          The determination made by the  Commissioner  in  Docket  No.  ARL
          11408-Q that the owner is required to refund  $7,194.48   may  be
          filed and enforced as a judgment  or  not  in  excess  of  twenty
          percent thereof per month of the amount owed by the owner may  be
          offset against any rent thereafter due the owner.

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

          ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the  same  hereby  is,
          denied, and that the Administrator's Order under  Docket  No.  BL
          110056-RP/TC 074355-G, as amended, issued on February  11,  1988,
          be revoked. It is further ordered  that  the  issues  decided  in
          Administrator's order No. TC 743355-G, as amended and affirmed in 
          the Commissioner's Order and Opinion under Docket No. A L  11408-
          Q, issued on March 11, 1987, remain as so resolved.


          CC 110275-RO

                                                   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