DHCR Decisions          CC210334RO                             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. CC210334-RO                                          :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE           MCD Realty Co.,                   DOCKET NO. AJ210226R                                                                                         TENANT: Ianthe Giles                                                    PETITIONER    :      ------------------------------------X                                       ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW      On March 1, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for      Administrative Review against an order issued on January 26, 1988, by a      Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations known as            645 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment No. 4B, wherein the      Rent Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the tenant.      The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the provisions      of Section 2526.1 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 commenced by the tenant's filing of a rent      overcharge complaint on October 1, 1986.  The tenant assumed occupancy      in June, 1986 pursuant to a one year lease at a rent of $360.00 per      month.      In answer to the complaint, the owner submitted leases dating from      October, 1983.  According to the lease commencing on that date, and      terminating on October 14, 1985, the rent on April 1, 1984 was $277.16      per month.  The rent charged for the subsequent lease term, from October      15, 1985 to October 14, 1986, was $303.25 per month.  The subsequent      lease was the complainant's vacancy lease.      In Order Number AJ210226R, issued on January 26, 1988, the Administrator      determined that the tenant had been overcharged a total of $900.70,      including excess security and interest on overcharges collected on and      after April 1, 1984.      In this petition, the owner contends that the Rent Administrator used an      incorrect base rent.  The petition claims that the base rent on April 1,          CC210334RO      1984 was $295.00 per month.      The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.      The record in this case establishes that the owner had submitted into      the record below which a lease covered the period from October 15, 1983      though October 14, 1985, and that such lease documented an initial legal      registered rent of $277.16 on April 1, 1984.  This amount is confirmed      in DHCR registration records.  The owner's claim that the actual rent      was $295.00 per month is not independently supported by evidence, and is      in conflict with the documentation previously submitted by the owenr.        The petition is therefore denied.      The owner is directed to reflect the findings and determinations made in      this order on all future registrations filed, citing this 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      this order.  The owner is further directed to adjust subsequent rents to      an amount no greater than that determined by this order plus any lawful      increases.      The Commissioner has determined in this Order and Opinion that the owner      collected overcharges of $900.70.  This Order may, upon expiration of      the period for seeking review of this Order and Opinion pursuant to      Article Seventy-eight of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, be filed and      enforced as a judgment.   Where the tenant files this Order as a      judgment, the County Clerk may add to the overcharge, interest at the      rate payable on a judgment pursuant to Section 5004 of the Civil      Practice Law and Rules from the issuance date of the Rent      Administrator's Order to the issuance date of the Commissioner's Order.      A copy of this opinion will be sent to the current tenant in occupancy.      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.      ISSUED:                                                                                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA                                      Deputy Commissioner