DI 110268 RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
------------------------------------X SJR No. 6056
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO. DI 110268 RO
: DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
Ascot Management, DOCKET NO. 25,041
TENANT: Carlos Blanco
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 14, 1989, the above-named petitioner filed an
Appeal against an order issued on December 19, 1988, by the
District Rent Administrator of the Queens District Rent Office,
concerning the housing accommodations known as 147-15 76th
Street, Flushing, New York, Apartment No. 1D.
On September 13, 1991, the Commissioner issued an order and
opinion dismissing the petitioner's administrative appeal.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner filed a petition in Supreme
Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules
requesting that the order of the Commissioner be annulled.
On March 26, 1992 an order was signed by the Honorable
Edwin Kassoff, Justice, remitting the proceeding to the Division
of Housing and Community Renewal, Office of Rent Administration,
for determination on the merits.
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 tenant on July
30, 1984 by the filing of an objection to the apartment
registration including, among other things, a rent overcharge
complaint. The owner was served with a copy of the tenant's
complaint but only submitted a lease history from April 1, 1983.
DI 110268 RO
In Order Number 25,041, the Rent Administrator among other
things, established the lawful stabilized rent as $253.45
effective April 1, 1983, determined that the tenant had been
overcharged and directed a refund to the tenant of $8,082.78
including treble damages on overcharges collected on and after
April 1, 1984.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the Order
should not have imposed treble damages against the owner because
the premises were purchased by the prior owner at a judicial sale
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
An examination of the record in this case discloses that the
owner failed to raise this argument before the Administrator and
therefore can not raise it for the first time on appeal.
Furthermore, the owner failed to submit an proof in his petition
that indeed a judicial sale occurred in 1985. Finally, it should
be noted that Section 2526.(4)(f)(2) of the Rent Stabilization
Code provides relief for a "current owner" who purchase a
building after a judicial sale. In the instant case, the
petitioner is the managing agent for Johar Gardens Owner
Corporation who purchased the properly from G & I Properties Inc.
and not from a judicial sale.
Accordingly, the Rent Administrator's order was warranted.
Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through
November 30, 1988, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent
rents to an amount no greater than that determined by the Rent
Administrator's order plus any lawful increases, and to register
any adjusted rents with this order and opinion being given as the
explanation for the adjustment.
This order may, upon the expiration of the period in which the
owner may institute a proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the
Civil Practice Law and Rules, be filed and enforced in the same
manner as a judgment or not in excess of twenty percent per month
thereof may be offset against any rent thereafter due the owner.
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
Acting Deputy Commissioner
DI 110268 RO