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

          APPEAL OF                                DOCKET NO. CC610344RO
                                              :    DRO DOCKET NO.
                Eustace Bocchus,                   B3100107-R/T
                                                   TENANT: Milcar Burgos
                               PETITIONER     :


          On March 22, 1988 the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition 
          for Administrative Review against an order issued on February 17, 
          1988,  by  a   Rent   Administrator,   concerning   the   housing
          accommodations known as 1692 Grand Concourse,  Bronx,  New  York,
          Apartment No.22 wherein the Rent Administrator determined that the 
          owner had overcharged the tenant.

          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
          provisions 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 Administrative Appeal is being  determined  pursuant  to  the
          provisions of Section 42A of the former 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 by the filing in of a rent 
          overcharge complaint by the tenant on March 30, 1984.  The tenant 
          had assumed occupancy on March 1, 1981 pursuant to a two year lease 
          at a rent of $240.83 per month.   In  response  to  the  tenant's
          complaint, the owner stated in substance that she had acquired the 
          building in 1982, when the tenant was paying $240.00 per month 



          rent, and had added the correct increase in accordance with the 
          guidelines, and also an MCI increase, which had been approved in an 
          order, Docket Number OM-3518, which was enclosed.   However,  the
          owner submitted no rental  history  prior  to  the  complainant's
          vacancy lease.

          In Order Number B3100107R/T, the Rent Administrator determined that 
          due to the owner's failure to submit a complete rental history, the 
          owner had collected a rent  overcharge  of  $1,210.93,  including
          interest on that portion of the overcharge occurring on and after 
          April 1, 1984.

          In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the tenant 
          was paying the "fair market price" for the apartment, and that all 
          rent increases had been correctly computed.

          The tenant did not answer the owner's petition.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should  be

          Section 42A of the former Rent Stabilization Code requires that an 
          owner retain complete records for each  stabilized  apartment  in
          effect from June 30, 1974 to date and produce them to the DHCR upon 
          demand.  If the apartment was decontrolled from the Rent  Control
          Law after June 30, 1974,  the  owner  must  provide  satisfactory
          documentary evidence of the apartment's  date  of  decontrol  and
          submit a rental history from that date.

          In the instant case, the owner has not provided a complete rental 
          history as mandated  by  Section  42A.   Accaordingly,  the  Rent
          Administrator's order establishing the lawful stabilization  rent
          utilizing the Section 42A default procedure and  finding  a  rent
          overcharge was warranted.

          The owner is directed to reflect the findings and  determinations
          made in this order on all future registration statements, including 
          those for the current year if not already 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 $1,210.93.  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 or not in excess of 
          twenty percent per month of the overcharge may be offset  against
          any rent thereafter due the owner.  Where the tenant credits  the
          overcharge, the tenant may add to the overcharge, or 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.

          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