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

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.CK210160RT
                                              :  DRO DOCKET NO. ZBC210102R
               VERNON POUNCEY  

                                PETITIONER    : 

               On November 17, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed 
          a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on 
          October 17, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall 
          Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations 
          known as 1155 East 35th Street, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment No. 
          A9, wherein the Rent Administrator terminated the proceeding on the 
          basis that the tenant's complaint was not timely filed.

               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 

               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 February, 1987 by 
          the filing of a tenant's complaint of rent overcharge in which the 
          tenant stated that he was served with the apartment registration 
          form but that he had originally filed a rent overcharge complaint in 
          1983.  The tenant further stated that the prior tenant had been 
          residing in the subject apartment for over thirty years and that he 
          believed his initial rent after the prior tenant vacated was too 

               In response to the tenant's complaint, the owner stated that 
          the apartment registration form had been hand delivered to the 
          tenant on June 28, 1984, and that accordingly, the tenant's 
          complaint should be dismissed as untimely.  The owner submitted a 
          signed receipt from the tenant as proof of service.

               In Docket ZBC210102R, the Rent Administrator terminated the 
          tenant's complaint on the basis that it was not timely filed.

               In this petition, the tenant alleges in substance that his 
          complaint was not about a rent increase but that he was questioning 
          the initial rent he was charged when he first moved to the subject 



               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be 

               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.  In the instant case, 
          the owner submitted the signed receipt proving hand delivery on the 
          tenant on May 28, 1984.  Since the tenant did not file the instant 
          complaint until 1987, said complaint was not timely and the Rent 
          Administrator properly dismissed it.  Further an examination of DHCR 
          rent records does not disclose that the tenant had filed an earlier 
          complaint in 1983 as the tenant alleged in the overcharge complaint 

               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, denied, and, that the order of the Rent 
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.


                                          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