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

      APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO. CF110143RT

          NANCY LU,                       :  DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
                                             DOCKET NO.000053488
                                             OWNER:GARY P. KLEINER            
                            PETITIONER    : 


      On June 22, 1988 the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition for 
      Administrative Review against an order issued on May 24, 1988 by the 
      Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, New York concerning 
      housing accommodations known as Apartment F4 at 28-05 33rd Street, 
      Astoria, New York wherein the Rent Administrator dismissed the tenant's 
      registration objection as untimely.

      The issue in this appeal is whether the Rent Administrator's order was 

      The applicable sections of the Law are Section 26-516 of the Rent 
      Stabilization Law and Sections 2521.1 and 2526.1(a) of the Rent 
      Stabilization Code.

      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 on November 13, 1984 of a 
      Tenant's objection to Rent/Services Registration by the tenant, in which 
      she stated that she had commenced occupancy on May 15, 1984 at a rent of 
      $460.82 per month, and that she was uncertain of the date that the 
      apartment registration had been delivered by hand.  (The owner later 
      submitted a copy of a receipt signed by the tenant wherein she stated 
      that she had received it on August 8, 1984.)         
      In an order issued on May 24, 1988 the Administrator dismissed the 
      objection as having been filed more than 90 days after the tenant 
      received the registration.


      In this petition, the tenant contends in substance that the owner 
      deliberately neglected to put the former tenant's rent of $267.38 on her 
      lease; that she became aware only on November 3, 1984 that the prior 
      tenant had been paying about $260.00; that she immediately began calling 
      the owner, leaving numerous messages requesting that she be informed 
      immediately of the prior tenant's rent and of how her own rent of 
      $460.82 had been arrived at; that the owner did not return her calls 
      until the night of November 7, the 91st day; that he claimed that 
      $5,187.61 of improvements had been made; that this is unlikely; and that 
      her objection should not be terminated due to lateness, since such 
      lateness was due to the owner's lateness in giving her the information 
      that she needed to file a timely complaint.

      In answer, the owner asserts in substance that the tenant's petition 
      does not deny that her objection was untimely.

      The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied. 

      The RR-1 apartment registration form for 1984 informed the tenant that 
      if any information was incorrect, or if she believed that the rent shown 
      for April 1, 1984 was not the legal rent, she had 90 days to challenge 
      the registration.  Because the apartment was vacant on April 1, 1984 the 
      owner did not have to list any rent being charged on that date, although 
      the tenant's objection states that the form listed the April 1, 1984 
      rent as being $460.82, which was her lease rent.  Since the owner was 
      not obligated (or supposed) to list the prior tenant's rent on the form, 
      the registration would not be not made invalid if the owner had indeed 
      listed the complainant's rent.  While the owner was supposed to list the 
      prior tenant's rent on the rent stabilization rider to the complainant's 
      lease, the failure to do so would just give reason for the tenant to 
      file an overcharge complaint.  It has no bearing on the initial 
      registration of the apartment, or on the requirement to file on 
      objection to the registration within 90 days of its receipt.  Since the 
      envelope bearing the objection was postmarked on November 13, 1984, 97 
      days after the tenant received the registration, the objection was 
      untimely, and it was proper for the Administrator to dismiss it.

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

      ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and that 
      the Rent Administrator'order 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