STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: CC610341RO
Ronald Rettner, DRO DOCKET NO.: AG610337R
TENANT: Otilia Ramos
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 21, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against an order issued on February 26, 1988, by
the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica. New York,
concerning the housing accommodations known as 45 East Mosholu Parkway,
Bronx, New York, Apartment No. 3F, 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
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 filing of a rent overcharge
complaint on November 17, 1986. The tenant had assumed occupancy of the
subject premises on March 1, 1983 pursuant to a 2 year lease at a
monthly rent of $400.00, the tenant stated that the previous tenant was
under rent control and paid rent of only $200.00 per month.
The owner was served with the complaint and directed to submit a
complete rent history. In answer to the complaint, the owner stated
that the subject apartment was decontrolled in April 1972 and that the
initial stabilized rent of $400.00 and all subsquent rents have been
below the actual legal rent as determined under the guidelines.
In Order Number AG610337-R, the Rent Administrator determined that the
tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $567.15 including excess
security and interest. The order determined a lawful rent for the two
year renewal lease term commencing on March 1, 1986 of $451.56
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the Rent
Administrator erred in his calculations by omitting the rent increase
for an MCI that was approved by the DHCR in Docket Number OM5347, issued
on May 22, 1985. The owner contends that all overcharges are eliminated
by including that increase, as documented in a rent calculations chart
it submitted with the petition.
In response, the tenant agrees that the MCI should have been included,
but that his initial rent of $400.00 represents an overcharge over the
prior tenant's rent.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be granted.
The owner correctly contends that the Administrator mistakenly
determined an overcharge because she failed to consider the MCI increase
that was granted by the DHCR in Order Number OM5347, issued on May 22,
1985. Although the increase was made effective as of March 11, 1984,
the lease commencing on March 1, 1985 did not include it because the MCI
application was still pending. The (retroactive) increase to the rent
on March 11, 1984 thereby increased the tenant's lawful rent to $418.48.
This amount was the lawful April 1, 1984 base rent. As a result, the
overcharge found in the lease term commencing on March 1, 1986 is
eliminated, and the Commissioner finds that the lease rent of $472.42
Accordingly, there was no rent overcharge.
If the owner has already complied with the Rent Administrator's order
and there are arrears due to the owner as a result of the instant
determination, the tenant is permitted to pay off the arrears in 24
equal monthly installments. Should the tenant vacate after the issuance
of this order or have already vacated, said arrears shall be payable
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, granted, that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the
same hereby is, revoked, and it is found that no rent overcharge
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA