CC210230RT

                                  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 NO.:  CC210230RT
                                                           
                                               DRO DOCKET NOS.:K3101761RT
                                                               CDR 32750
                                                            (ZCG-210201-R)
                    J. LAWRENCE CHERRY,
                                               OWNERS: MICHAEL PISTILLI,
                                                       JOSEPH PISTILLI,
                                                       ANTHONY PISTILLI

                                               PRIOR OWNER:LYDIA (HERMAN) DELGADO
                                               PRIOR OWNER:J.F.I.B. REALTY CORP.
                                                    
                                   PETITIONER
            ----------------------------------X


                   ORDER AND OPINION TERMINATING PROCEEDING IN DOCKET
                                    NUMBER CC210230RT


            On March 22, 1988 the above named petitioner-tenant filed a 
            Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on 
            February 29, 1988 by the District Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus 
            Circle, New York, New York concerning housing accommodations known 
            as Apartment A25 at 76 India Street, Brooklyn, New York wherein the 
            District Rent Administrator determined that the owner had 
            overcharged the tenant.

            This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing in March, 
            1984 of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant, in which he 
            stated that he had commenced occupancy on April 13, 1983 at a rent 
            of $350.00 per month.  His initial lease contained a rider stating 
            that the prior tenant Cruz had a final rent of $336.00 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.  
















          CC210230RT

            In answer to the complaint Lydia Herman, President of S.G. 
            Management, submitted a rental history form giving the following 
            information regarding lease dates, tenant names and rents:

                            8/1978   Merb           $130.00

                           11/1978   Bokala         $115.00

                              1981                  $165.00

                              1982   Markovitch     $220.00

                              1983   Cherry         $350.00

            She enclosed rent ledgers for July-December of 1978, July-December 
            of 1981 and July-November of 1982.  They contained no tenant names.  
            She also enclosed an order granting a 42.75% rent increase 
            effective May 13, 1981.  In support of a claimed increase for 
            renovations performed just prior to the time the complainant 
            commenced occupancy, she later enclosed cancelled checks dated in 
            April and May of 1983 to four individuals, totalling $1,420.00.  
            Other than "6 hours" written on one check, none of the checks give 
            any indication as to what they concern.  After photocopies were 
            made of each check, someone wrote "A25" on each of them before they 
            were mailed to the Division of Housing and Community Renewal 
            (DHCR).  Ms. Herman did not enclose any invoices or proposals 
            concerning the work.  While her covering letter promised later 
            submission of checks for materials used in the claimed renovation, 
            such checks are not contained in the record.

            In an order issued on February 29, 1988 the Administrator 
            determined an overcharge of $1,314.30 as of April 14, 1984.  The 
            order listed the prior tenant as Markovitch, and allowed an 
            increase based on the full $1,420.00 cost of labor for the claimed 
            renovations.  The Petition for Administrative Review considered 
            herein is an appeal of that order.

            Several months after that order was issued the tenant filed another 
            overcharge complaint under Docket No. CG210201R, naming Michael 
            Pistilli as the owner.  (The 1987 through 1991 registrations name 
            him as both the owner and the manager, other than the 1987 
            registration, which names Joseph Pistilli as the manager, at the 
            same address listed for Michael Pistilli.  It is apparent from a 
            recent stipulation that Michael Pistilli Joseph Pistilli and 
            Anthony Pistilli are co-owners.)





            On February 14, 1991 the Administrator sent the owner a Final 
            Notice, proposing to find an overcharge of $24,249.87 from April 






          CC210230RT

            15, 1984 to the time the tenant vacated on January 31, 1989, based 
            on freezing the lawful April 1, 1984 rent (determined in Docket No. 
            K3101761RT) because of the owner's failure to register the 
            apartment for 1985, deeming leases at Guidelines percentages of 
            increase to estimate the rent charged, and imposing treble damages.

            In a response dated March 1, 1991 Michael Pistilli submitted a 
            date-stamped 1985 Annual Registration Summary prepared by JFIB 
            Realty Corporation, the owner through 1986; a receipt dated August 
            8, 1985 bearing the tenant's signature and stating that he received 
            the 1985 registration for his apartment; a so-ordered January 9, 
            1989 non-payment stipulation bearing the tenant's signature, which 
            granted final judgment of $6,104.00 for the owner, and in which the 
            tenant agreed both to vacate by January 13, 1989 and to drop any 
            and all claims with the DHCR; a General Release dated January 9, 
            1989 bearing the tenant's signature, which released the owner from 
            any claims for the apartment concerning overcharges, conditions in 
            the apartment, rights to the apartment, and harassment; and a 
            January 9, 1989 letter to the DHCR bearing the tenant's signature 
            and stating that, having been compensated by the owner, he withdrew 
            his complaint number CG210201R.

            In answer, the tenant contended that his signature on the January 
            9, 1989 letter was a forgery.  The tenant enclosed a copy of the 
            same stipulation submitted by the owner, but lacking the sentence 
            wherein the tenant agreed to drop all DHCR claims.

            In an order issued on April 12, 1991 the Administrator closed 
            Docket No. CG210201R as being duplicative of Docket Nos.K3101761RT 
            and CC210230RT, and stated that all matters would be resolved under 
            the decision in the appeal case.

            In his petition (Docket No. CC210230RT), the tenant asserted in 
            substance that long-term tenants in the building did not remember 
            any tenant named Markovitch, although one tenant remembered a 
            Markovitch at 74 India Street; that he was not given new leases, 
            other than receiving a rider in 1985; that treble damages should be 
            imposed; that while his original lease listed a prior tenant Cruz 
            at a rent of $336.00, there is no record of him, no one in the 
            building knows of him, and the tenant association is not aware of 
            him; that this is further evidence of fraud and an intent to 
            deceive; that he has not received any registration statements since 
            1984; that the apartment was not renovated prior to his tenancy; 
            that the appliances were not new; that he never received interest 
            on his security deposit; and that the order should reflect rent 
            increases after 1984.


            The DHCR's Enforcement Unit subsequently commenced a proceeding, 
            Docket No.FE210003HM, because of the question of the credibility of 
            documents submitted by the owner.  
             












          CC210230RT

            In a December, 1993 Stipulation and Settlement of the charges by 
            the Enforcement Unit against Joseph Pistilli, Michael Pistilli and 
            Anthony Pistilli, the Enforcement Unit agreed to discontinue the 
            Enforcement case, and to not refer the matter to any enforcement 
            agency, in exchange for receiving a sum of money in full payment of 
            administrative and processing costs.  The three owners agreed to 
            proceed with a hearing, as stated in a Notice of Hearing, regarding 
            the tenant's Petition for Administrative Review, and to accept the 
            DHCR's determination of the appeal as final and binding, although 
            the stipulation stated that the owners were not barred from 
            agreeing otherwise with the tenant.  The stipulation also stated 
            that it did not constitute an admission by the owners of any 
            allegation in the Enforcement case or of any other facts.

            On February 10, 1994, at the hearing before an Administrative Law 
            Judge, the tenant and the owners reached a settlement wherein the 
            tenant, in return for a sum of money, discontinued his appeal with 
            prejudice, agreed not to file any other complaint in any court or 
            administrative agency against the owners regarding his tenancy, and 
            agreed not to disseminate the terms of the settlement to the media, 
            past or present tenants of the owner's properties, or any tenants' 
            organizations or advocacy groups.  A separate stipulation was to be 
            filed to discontinue an action by the tenant in Kings County 
            Supreme Court. The Stipulation of Settlement also stated that the 
            owners by entering into the stipulation did not admit to any 
            wrongdoing or any of the allegations contained in the tenant's 
            appeal or any related matter before the DHCR stemming from any of 
            the tenant's filed complaints.

            Because the tenant has withdrawn his appeal, there is now nothing 
            for the DHCR to decide.  Therefore, the proceeding in Docket No. 
            CC210230RT is terminated.  

            The Commissioner notes that, the only appeal of the Administrator's 
            order having been withdrawn, the Administrator's order, determining 
            a lawful stabilization rent of $248.90 per month in the lease from 
            April 15, 1983 to April 14, 1984, is now final.  The owners are 
            directed to reflect the findings and determinations made in the 
            Administrator's order on all future registration statements, 
            including those for the current year if not already filed, citing 
            the Administrator's 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 the Administrator's 




            order.  The owners are further directed to adjust subsequent rents 
            to an amount no greater than that determined by the Administrator's 
            order plus any lawful increases.  A copy of this order is being 
            sent to the current tenant.







          CC210230RT

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

            ORDERED, that the proceeding in Docket No. CC210230RT be, and the 
            same hereby is, terminated and that the Administrator's order in 
            Docket No K3101761RT be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.



            ISSUED:

                                                    ------------------------
                                                      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