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. CF210289RO
Henry Bravo : DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
DOCKET NO. 036564
TENANT: Angela Rodriquez
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 22, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order issued on May 20, 1988, by a
Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommodations known as
apartment 7 at 349 Linden Street, Brooklyn, New York wherein the
Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the tenant.
In the 1984 complaint by which this proceeding was commenced, the
tenant stated that she had received the registration form from the
owner. In the ensuing aforementioned order, here appealed, the
Administrator stated that the complaint had been filed on November 7,
1984, and made his overcharge determination based on a rental history
starting with 1980.
In appealing that determination the owner presents evidence that he
had caused the aforementioned registration form to be mailed to the
tenant on August 13, 1984, and argues that the complaint was filed more
than 90 days thereafter (rendering erroneous the Administrator's
refusal to accept the rent charged on April 1, 1984, as lawful). The
specific argument is that (regardless of what is indicated by the date-
received stamp used by this Division) the tenant signed the complaint
on November 25, 1984 (as she herself wrote under her signature
thereon).
The tenant's answer reads in its entirety:
Please be informed that the date 11/25/84 which is
on the Rent over-charge form is correct, it may
have been that the Rent overcharge office made a
mistake when the date was stamped on the form. I
signed the form and immediately dated it. Can your
office please check and see if the mistake was on
your part.
Thank you, if any other information is needed please
inform me right away.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
It is true that the tenant dated the signature on her complaint
"11/25/84," and that she insists that date was correct when written. It
is also true, however, not only that the complaint was clearly date-
stamped "NOV 7 1984" by this Division, but that the envelope in which
it was mailed (attached to it in the Administrator's file and bearing
the proper address and return address) bears a post-office stamp
reading "31 OCT 1984."
In the face of such evidence the Commissioner will not credit the
tenant's 1988 assertion concerning when she signed the 1984 complaint,
and will instead find that it was indeed mailed in October 1984 and
stamped as received by the DHCR on November 7, 1984. The complaint was
thus filed within 90 days of service of the registration form, so that
the Administrator was correct in finding a rent overcharge based on the
rental history from April 1, 1980, since the tenant had filed a timely
complaint as to the April 1, 1984 registered rent. Accordingly, the
Rent Administrator's order was warranted.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabilization
Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition 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
|
