DH 530372 RO; EH 530100 RO
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
SJR 6015 REMIT
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.:
DH 530372 RO
EH 530100 RO
2461 AMSTERDAM AVENUE RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NOS.:
PETITIONER CE 530017 B
DH 530210 OR
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING IN PART OWNER'S PETITION FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (DH 530372 RO) AND TERMINATING PETITION FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (EH 530100 RO) AFTER RECONSIDERATION PURSUANT
TO COURT ORDER
The above entitled proceeding is before the Commissioner
pursuant to an order of remand issued on March 10, 1992 by the
Supreme Court, NY County (Sherman, J.).
The above named petitioner-owner filed Petitions for
Administrative Review against the above referenced orders of the
Rent Administrator. On September 20, 1991, the Commissioner issued
an Order and Opinion granting in part the owner's petition for
review of the rent reduction order (CE 530017 B) by revoking the
rent reduction for all but two tenants for whom the reduction was
affirmed for the period from March 1, 1989 through November 30,
1989, the effective date of the rent restoration ordered in Docket
No. DH 530210 OR. The Commissioner also ruled that if any arrears
were due and payable to the owner as result of this determination,
the tenants could pay off any such arrears in twelve (12) equal
monthly installments.
Nine tenants then proceeded to seek judicial review of the
Commissioner's order and opinion in the Supreme Court, New York
County pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.
On March 10, 1992 an order was issued by the court (Sherman, J.)
which denied the tenants' application and dismissed the petition
except for an issue relating to the period of payback of rent
arrears ordered by the Commissioner. This issue was remanded to
the Commissioner and is the sole subject of the instant order.
DH 530372 RO; EH 530100 RO
The Commissioner has reviewed the record, as well as the
statements of the parties submitted during the Article 78
proceeding, and carefully considered that portion relevant to the
issue for which the proceeding was remanded by the court.
The tenants, in their Article 78 proceeding, advanced the
argument that the 12 month payback period for rent arrears should
not have been ordered without notice to them and an opportunity to
be heard on the issue of their individual ability to pay. In their
brief filed with the court the tenants stated their position on the
question at issue. It is the position of the tenants that the
Commissioner's order imposes a financial hardship on them as they
do not have the financial means to pay off the arrears in a twelve
month period. The tenants argue that the Commissioner should order
a longer payback period and state that a period of thirty months
would be more equitable.
At the outset, the Commissioner notes that prior agency and
judicial decisions have held that neither due process nor the rent
stabilization statutes require the holding of a hearing in a
situation such as this and the court did not order the agency to
conduct such a hearing. It is also noted that the Commissioner's
September 20, 1991 order revoked the rent reduction for all but two
tenants. There is no requirement in the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code for affording tenants any time to refund rent arrears when a
rent reduction is revoked. Upon such revocation, the owner is
entitled to collect the full rent, unadjusted by the rent
reduction.
However, in view of the Commissioner's prior directive to the
owner to permit the tenants to pay back arrears in twelve
installments, and the remand by the court to reconsider this aspect
of the order, the Commissioner deems it appropriate to again afford
the tenants a payback period. Inasmuch as the tenants have now had
twelve months to pay arrears since the September 20, 1991 order was
issued, the directive to pay any remaining arrears in twelve months
commencing with the first rent payment date following issuance of
the order is reaffirmed, effectively affording the tenants more
than 24 months to make any necessary refunds.
DH 530372 RO; EH 530100 RO
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it
is
ORDERED, that the owner's petition for administrative review
(DH 530372 RO) be, and the same hereby is, granted in part and that
administrative review proceeding (EH 530100 RO) be, and the same
hereby is, terminated.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
