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

            APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO. CI120250RO
                                                :  DRO DOCKET NO.Q3121685R

                                  PETITIONER    : 

                 On September 23, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed 
            a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on 
            August 19, 1988, by the Rent Administrator,  92-31 Union Hall 
            Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations 
            known as 41-25 Kissena Boulevard, Flushing,  New York, Apartment No. 
            6M 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 originally commenced by the filing in 
            March, 1984 of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant in which 
            the tenant stated that he first moved to the subject apartment in 
            November, 1977.

                 In answer to the tenant's complaint, the owner stated in 
            substance that it did not have a rental history prior to occupancy 
            by the tenant herein.  The owner submitted a rental history from the 
            initial occupancy of the tenant herein.

                 In Order Number CDR 33,881, the Rent Administrator determined 
            that, due to the owner's failure to submit a complete rental 
            history, the tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $9027.99 
            through July 1, 1978, and directed the owner to refund such 
            overcharge to the tenant as well as to reduce the rent.

                 In this petition, the owner contends in substance that it did 
            not default as it submitted all the rent records it had and that the 
            DHCR should have compelled the prior owner to submit the missing 
            rental history covering the period prior to occupancy by the tenant 


                 In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in 
            substance that the Rent Administrator's order should be affirmed.

                 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 (or the date the apartment became subject 
            to rent stabilization, if later) and to produce such records to the 
            DHCR upon demand.

                 Section 26-516 of the Rent Stabilization Law, effective April 
            1, 1984, limited an owner's obligation to provide rent records by 
            providing that an owner may not be required to maintain or to 
            produce rent records for more than four (4) years prior to the most 
            recent registration, and concomitantly, established a four year 
            limitation on the calculation of rent overcharges.

                 It has been the DHCR's policy that overcharge complaints filed 
            prior to April 1, 1984, are to be processed pursuant to the Law or 
            Code in effect on March 31, 1984. (see Section 2526.1 (a) (4) of the 
            current Rent Stabilization Code.)  The DHCR has therefore applied 
            Section 42A of the former Code to overcharge complaints filed prior 
            to April 1, 1984, requiring complete rent records in these cases.  
            In following this policy, the DHCR has sought to be consistent with 
            the legislative intent of the Omnibus Housing Act (Chapter 403, Laws 
            of 1983), as implemented by the New York City Conciliation and 
            Appeals Board (CAB) the predecessor agency to the DHCR, to determine 
            rent overcharge complaints filed with the CAB prior to April 1, 
            1984, by applying the law in effect at the time such complaints were 
            filed so as not to deprive such tenants of their rights to have the 
            lawful stabilized rent determined from the June 30, 1974 base date 
            and so as not to deprive tenants whose overcharge claims accrued 
            more than four years prior to April 1, 1984 of the right to recover 
            such overcharges.  In such cases, if the owner failed to produce the 
            required rent records, the lawful stabilized rent would be 
            determined pursuant to the default procedure approved by the Court 
            of Appeals in 61 Jane Street Associates v. CAB, 65 N.Y.2d 898, 493 
            N.Y. S. 2d 455 (1985).

                 However, it has recently been held in the case of J.R.D. Mgmt. 
            v. Eimicke, 148 A.D.2d 610. 539 N.Y.S. 2d 667 (App. Div. 2d Dept., 
            1989). motion for leave to reargue or for leave to appeal to the 
            Court of Appeals denied ( App. Div. 2d Dept., N.Y.L.J., 
            June 28, 1989. p.25, col.1), motion for leave to appeal to the Court 
            of Appeals denied (Court of Appeals, N.Y.L.J., Nov. 24, 1989, p.24, 
            col.4)., motion for leave to reargue denied (Court of Appeals, 
            N.Y.L.J., Feb. 15, 1990, p.25, col.1), that the Law in effect at the 
            time of the determination of the administrative complaint rather 
            than the Law in effect at the time of the filing of the complaint 
            must be applied and that the DHCR could not require an owner to 


            produce more than four years of rent records.

                 Since the issuance of the decision in JRD, the Appellate 
            Division, First Department, in the case of Lavanant v. DHCR, 148 
            A.D.2d 185, 544 N.Y.S.2d 331 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 1989), has issued 
            a decision in direct conflict with the holding in JRD.  The Lavanant 
            court expressly rejected the JRD ruling finding that the DHCR may 
            properly require an owner to submit complete rent records, rather 
            than records for just four years, and that such requirement is both 
            rational and supported by the Law and legislative history of the 
            Omnibus Housing Act.

                 Since in the instant case the subject dwelling unit is located 
            in the Second Department, the DHCR is constrained to follow the JRD 
            decision in determining the tenant's overcharge complaint, limiting 
            the requirement for rent records to April 1, 1980.  An examination 
            of the rent records from April 1, 1980 discloses that no rent 
            overcharge occurred.  Therefore, the Rent Administrator's order 
            finding a rent overcharge must be revoked.

                 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 immediately.

                 THEREFORE, in accordance with the Appellate Division ruling in 
            JRD, 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 occurred.


                                            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