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 NOS: CJ 410042-RO
                         
                                                  D.R.O. DOCKET NO:
                                                  TC-08133-G; CDR 34035
               
          Daisy    Rosenberg    (authorized                 ARTICLE     7-A
          representative of Maurice Abelson),     ADMINISTRATOR: 
                                                  Murray Schactman
                                                                      
                                                  OWNER: Maurice Abelson, 
                                                  H-O Realty Corporation
                                                  
                                                  TENANT: Eric Weitz
           
                                   PETITIONER
          --------------------------------------x

          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On October 19, 1988 the above named petitioner filed  a  Petition
          for Administrative Review against an order  issued  on  September
          14, 1988 by the District Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus  Circle,
          New York, New York concerning  housing  accommodations  known  as
          Apartment 15 at 66 West 10th Street, New York, New  York  wherein
          the District Rent Administrator determined that  the  tenant  had
          not been overcharged, and  that  the  lawful  stabilization  rent
          commencing September 1, 1983 was the $355.48 rent stated  in  the
          lease commencing that date.  

          The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was  filed  prior  to
          April 1, 1984.  Sections 2526.1 (a)(4) and 2521.1 (d) of the Rent 
          Stabilization  Code  (effective  May  1,  1987)  governing   rent
          overcharge  and  fair  market  rent  proceedings   provide   that
          determination of these matters be based  upon  the  law  or  code
          provision  in  effect  on  March  31,  1984.   Therefore,  unless
          otherwise  indicated,  reference  to   Sections   of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Code (Code) contained herein are  to  the  Code  in
          effect on April 30, 1987.

          The  issue  in  this  appeal  is  whether   the   District   Rent
          Administrator's order was warranted.
          Docket No. CJ 410042-RO       - 2 -


          The applicable sections of the Law are Section 26-516 of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Section 2526.1(a) of the current Rent 
          Stabilization Code.







          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  in
          January, 1984 of a rent overcharge complaint by  the  tenant,  in
          which he stated that he had commenced occupancy on  September  1,
          1983 at a rent of $355.48 per month.

          The owner was served  with  a  copy  of  the  complaint  and  was
          requested to submit rent records to prove the lawfulness  of  the
          rent being charged.   In  answer  to  the  complaint,  the  owner
          submitted a  complete  rental  history,  including  invoices  for
          improvements and new equipment, from the base date as required.

          In an order issued  on  September  14,  1988  the  District  Rent
          Administrator determined that there had been no overcharge as  of
          the end of the complainant's initial lease, and that  the  lawful
          stabilization rent was the $355.48 stated in the lease.

          In this petition, the representative of  the  owner  contends  in
          substance  that  the  court  order  appointing  the  Article  7-A
          Administrator  directed  him  to   charge   the   maximum   legal
          residential rents; that Item No. 7 of that  order  provided  that
          his fee (5% of the rents collected) was subject to his compliance 
          with the order and without prejudice to the rights of any  party;
          that the owner therefore stated in his  answer  to  the  tenant's
          complaint: "[p]lease set the rent for this apartment.  Owner  and
          7A Administrator disagree on the rent  Tenant  should  pay";  and
          that the lawful stabilization rent in the tenant's initial  lease
          should be established at $407.00, the maximum legal  amount  that
          the 7-A Administrator could have charged and was indeed  mandated
          to charge by the court order appointing him. 

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

          It has long been DHCR policy that when the rent actually  charged
          is less than the  rent  with  maximum  permitted  increases,  the
          lawful stabilization rent is limited to the  rent  charged.   The
          petitioner is  claiming  that  the  court  order  overrules  that
          policy.  It is not necessary to decide whether the court had  the
          power to do that in its order appointing the  7-A  Administrator,
          because the Court order actually did not even purport to do that, 
          as can be seen by reading the ending of Item 7, which ending  was
          omitted by the  petitioner.   The  7-A  Administrator's  fee  was
          authorized "without prejudice to the rights of any  party  hereto
          Docket No. CJ 410042-RO       - 3 -

          or the Administrator to move the Court for a modification of said 
          fee, either permanent or temporary."  [Emphasis added to words 

          omitted by  the  petitioner.]   This  relates  only  to  the  7-A
          Administrator's fee, not to  any  entitlement  of  the  owner  to
          lawfully charge a higher rent than stated in the  tenant's  lease
          and charged the tenant.   

          This determination is without prejudice to any rights  which  the
          owner may have against  the  7-A  Administrator  in  a  court  of






          competent jurisdiction.

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

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same  hereby  is,  denied
          and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, ant the same 
          hereby is, affirmed.  The lawful stabilization  rent  is  $355.48
          per month in the lease from September 1, 1983 to August 31, 1986.

          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