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.: DL 410018-RO &
                                         :              DL 410005-RT
                                            DRO DOCKET NO.: CG 410045-RP,
       CLARENDON MANAGEMENT CORP. AND                       AG 110669-R
       KERMIT S. IMBREY,   PETITIONERS   :                 
     ------------------------------------X                             

        ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING THE TENANT'S PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
         IN PART, GRANTING THE OWNER'S PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          AND REMANDING THE PROCEEDING TO THE DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR

     The above-named petitioner-owner and petitioner-tenant filed Petitions for 
     Administrative Review of an order  issued  on  November  3,  1989  by  the
     District Rent Administrator, Gertz Plaza, Jamaica,  New  York,  concerning
     housing accommodations known as Apartment 14B at 425 West 23rd Street, New 
     York, New York, wherein the District  Rent  Administrator  determined  the
     fair market rent pursuant to a comparability study and  the  special  fair
     market rent guideline promulgated by the New  York  City  Rent  Guidelines
     Board for use in calculating fair market rent appeals.

     The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the  record  and  has
     carefully considered that portion of the record  relevant  to  the  issues
     raised by the administrative appeal.

     This proceeding was originally commenced on July 21, 1986 by the filing of 
     a fair market rent appeal by the tenant on both a tenant's objection  form
     and an overcharge complaint form.  The tenant took occupancy pursuant to a 
     lease commencing April 9, 1986 and expiring April 30, 1988  at  a  monthly
     rent of $1275.00.

     By letter dated October 31, 1986, both the tenant and  his  representative
     advised that the parties had reached a  settlement  and  that  the  tenant
     wished to withdraw his fair market rent appeal.

     By order  issued  February  6,  1987,  the  Administrator  terminated  the
     proceeding based on the  tenant's  withdrawal  of  the  fair  market  rent
     appeal.

     The tenant thereafter filed a petition for administrative  review  (Docket
     Number BC  410014-RT)  wherein  the  tenant  requested  reopening  of  the
     proceeding , asserting that he was not properly advised of his rights  and
     was not represented by legal counsel and that  after  the  settlement  was
     reached, he learned about a pending case for a similar apartment  (14B  at
     445 W. 23rd St.) of which the owner did not advise the  tenant  and  which
     resulted in a reduced rent.  










          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
     By order issued on July 8, 1988  the  Commissioner  granted  the  tenant's
     petition, citing the fact that the settlement agreement was not so ordered 
     by a court of competent jurisdiction, and remanded the proceeding  to  the
     Administrator for processing of the tenant's fair market  rent  appeal  on
     the merits.  

     By  notice  dated  September  7,  1988,  the  Administrator  reopened  the
     proceeding.  The notice included a fair market  rent  appeal  package  and
     afforded both parties an opportunity to submit any relevant evidence.

     In answer the tenant cited as comparable apartments apartment 14B  at  445
     West 23rd  Street  at  an  adjusted  rent  of  approximately  $590.00  and
     apartment 14A at 425 West 23rd Street at a rent  of  $444.93.   The  owner
     cited and submitted documentation for apartments  16B  at  425  West  23rd
     Street, apartment 10B at 435 West 23rd Street, apartments 6E  and  17E  at
     450 West 24th Street, and apartments 15B, 11E and 17E  at  460  West  24th
     Street.

     By notice to the parties dated October 4,  1989,  the  owner  was  advised
     that the owner was required to submit a complete rental  history  for  all
     apartments in the subject line.

     By submission dated October  19,  1989,  the  owner  stated  that  it  was
     submitting the required rental  histories  for  all  currently  stabilized
     apartments in the subject line.  The owner submitted a rental history form 
     for apartment 2B indicating an adjustment rent of $596.58 effective May 1, 
     1982 and rental history forms for apartments 4B, 5B, 7B and 9B  indicating
     that those apartments were not rented to a first stabilized tenant  within
     a period 4 years before to  1  year  after  the  renting  of  the  subject
     apartment to the applicant.  The owner also resubmitted the  documentation
     for apartment 16B at 425 West 23rd Street and apartment 15B  at  460  West
     24th Street.  The owner also submitted a floor plan for all apartments and 
     asserted that the A line apartments are  not  comparable  to  the  B  line
     apartments and that apartment 14A at 425  West  23rd  Street  was  vacancy
     decontrolled in 1973.

     In the order under appeal herein, the District Rent Administrator adjusted 
     the initial legal regulated rent by establishing a  fair  market  rent  of
     $892.42 effective April 9, 1986, the commencement date of the initial rent 
     stabilized lease, and directed a refund of excess rent in  the  amount  of
     $9,564.00 to the tenant.  The Administrator  utilized  comparability  data
     stated by the Administrator to have been submitted by  the  owner  in  the
     comparability study, but did not utilize comparability data  submitted  by
     the tenant.

     In his petition, the tenant asserts  that  he  never  received  a  Summary
     Notice and did not know what figures were to be  used  and  was  therefore
     unable to challenge the owner's submission.  The tenant also requests that 
     the owner be directed to submit rent ledgers and leases for all comparable 
     apartments.  The tenant asserts that the buildings at 450 West 24th Street 
     and 460 West 24th Street are similar but not  comparable  to  the  subject
     building because they face in the opposite direction and  that  the  other
     apartments listed (the E and G lines at 425 West 23rd  Street  and  the  E
     line at 435 W. 23rd Steet) are not comparable to the subject apartment, 







          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
     but that the B line apartments on West 23rd Street are comparable  to  the
     subject apartment.  The tenant asserts that apartment 14B at 445 West 23rd 
     Street, which was cited by the tenant and which  was  first  rented  to  a
     stabilized tenant pursuant to a lease commencing July 1, 1983 and  had  an
     adjusted rent of $590.32 as of June 4, 1985, should have been used in  the
     comparability study.  The tenant also asserts that the rent cited  by  the
     owner for apartment 15B at 425 West 23rd Street is not  correct  that  the
     1974 Maximum Rent for the subject apartment indicated  on  the  DC-2  form
     which the owner sent  to  the  tenant  was  $217.67,  that  the  apartment
     registration sent to the tenant indicated a rent control rent on April  1,
     1984 of $402.64, and that it is evident from  this  information  that  the
     tenant's initial rent exceeded the fair  market  rent.   The  tenant  also
     asserts that the settlement should be taken into account because the  rent
     established by the Administrator ($892.42)  improperly  exceeds  the  rent
     actually paid by the tenant pursuant to the settlement ($775.00  effective
     November 1, 1986).

     In its petition, the owner asserts that the owner has continued to  charge
     the tenant  rent  consistent  with  the  settlement  agreement  which  was
     abrograted by the tenant, that the rent charged is substantially less than 
     the lawful rent established by the Administrator, and that as a result  of
     the  Administrator's  order,  the  tenant  owes  the   owner   substantial
     retroactive arrears.  The owner requests that the Administrator's order be 
     modified to order repayment of any resulting arrears owed by the tenant to 
     the owner within a reasonable time period.

     In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant asserts, among other things, 
     that modifying the Administrator's order as requested by the  owner  would
     cause the tenant undue hardship as it calls for more rent than the  tenant
     has been paying.

     In reply to the tenant's  answer,  the  owner  asserts  that  it  was  not
     required to submit as a comparable apartment 14B at 445 West 23rd  Street,
     but that the owner met  its  obligations  by  duly  submitting  comparable
     apartments within the subject building, including the  subject  line,  and
     the required supporting documentation.  The  owner  further  asserts  that
     exposure is not a criterion to be used in determining comparability,  that
     the E line is the mirror  image  of  the  B  line  and  that  the  A  line
     apartments are not comparable to the subject line.  The owner asserts that 
     the alleged misrepresentation cited by the tenant in  fact  resulted  from
     administrative errors by  the  DHCR  in  the  instant  order.   The  owner
     requests that the DHCR declare that the settlement  agreement  is  invalid
     and unenforceable, that the parties are bound by  the  DHCR's  order,  and
     reaffirm the owner's  right  to  retroactively  collect  the  higher  rent
     consistent with that order.

     By subsequent correspondence dated April 25, 1990 the tenant asserts  that
     the owner was required to include all comparable apartments in the subject 
     line for the comparability period (April 1, 1982 to March 31, 1987).   The
     tenant requests that only the B line apartments be used and lists a number 
     of B line apartments in  the  subject  building  (apt  2B)  and  in  other
     buildings.  By correspondence dated August 4,  1990,  the  tenant  states,
     among other things, that she settled the case in reliance on  the  owner's
     statement that the rent set was lower than that for any other B  apartment
     and that he sought to reopen the case after learning of the lower adjusted 







          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
     rent for apartment 14B at 445 West 23rd Street.  By  correspondence  dated
     July 8, 1991, the tenant  reiterated the arguments previously raised.   By
     correspondence dated July 25, 1991, the tenant asserted that the  rent  of
     the comparable apartments might be subject to challenge.

     The Commissioner is of the opinion that the tenant's  petition  should  be
     granted in part and the owner's petition should be granted.

     Pursuant to  Sections  2522.3(e)  and  (f)  the  Rent  Stabilization  Code
     effective May 1, 1987, for fair market rent appeals filed after  April  1,
     1984, comparability will be determined based on the following:

          (e)...(1) Legal regulated rents, for which the time to file a 
                Fair Market Rent Appeal has expired and no Fair 
                Market  Rent  Appeal  is  then  pending,  or  the  Fair
                Market Rent Appeal has been finally determined,
                charged pursuant to a lease commencing within a 4 
                year  period   prior   to,   or   a   1   year   period
                subsequent  to,  the  commencement   date  of   initial
                lease for the housing accommodation  involved; and

                (2) At the owner's option, market rents in  effect  for
                other comparable housing accommodations on the date 
                the initial lease for the housing accommodation 
                involved as submitted by the owner.

          (f)   Where the rents of the comparable housing accommodations 
                being considered are legal regulated rents,  for  which
                the  time  to  file  a  Fair  Market  Rent  Appeal  has
                expired, and such  rents  are  charged  pursuant  to  a
                lease  ending  more  than   1   year   prior   to   the
                commencement  date  of  the  initial  lease   for   the
                subject housing  accommodation,  such  rents  shall  be
                updated  by  renewal  leases,   commencing   with   the
                expiration of the  initial  lease  for  the  comparable
                housing  accommodation  to  a  date  within  12  months
                prior to  the  renting  of  the  housing  accommodation
                involved.

     Regarding  the  tenant's  assertion  that   the   Administrator   utilized
     incorrect  rents  for  comparable  apartments,  a  review  of  the  record
     indicates that the Administrator's order erroneously listed as  comparable
     apartments a number of apartments either not cited  by  the  owner  or  at
     rents not cited by the owner.  It appears  that the same  apartments  were
     erroneously listed by the Administrator at the wrong address  or  at  more
     than one address at the wrong rent.  The comparable  apartments  cited  by
     the owner for which the owner has provided adequate documentation  are  as
     follows:

          425 W. 23rd St.        2B         5/1/82       $596.58
          425 W. 23rd St.       16B        8/17/84      $1200.00
          435 W. 23rd St.       10B        3/12/86      $1250.00
          450 W. 24th St.        6E        1/15/87      $1225.00
          450 W. 24th St.       17E         8/1/86      $1300.00
          460 W. 24th St.       15B        11/1/86      $1300.00







          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
          460 W. 24th St.       11E        8/15/85      $1200.00
          460 W. 24th St.       17E        8/15/82       $975.00

     The owner is required to submit data  for  complete  lines  of  apartments
     beginning with the subject line.  The owner submitted rental history  data
     for the entire subject line of apartments, but  did  not  submit  complete
     data for the other lines  of  apartments  included  in  its  comparability
     submission.  The Commissioner finds that, inasmuch as the  Administrator's
     notice of October 4, 1989 advised the  owner  to  submit  complete  rental
     history  data  only  for  the  subject  line,  which  the  owner  promptly
     submitted, the proceeding should  be  remanded  to  the  Administrator  to
     afford the owner an opportunity to submit complete rental history data for 
     the other lines  of  apartments  included  in  the  owner's  comparability
     submission.  Any submission of comparability data made by the owner should 
     be forwarded to the tenant for comment.  If the owner fails to submit  the
     rent history data for the other lines, then, of the owner's  comparability
     submission, only the apartments in the subject line  (apts.  2B  and  16B)
     will be usable in the comparability study.

     Regarding the tenant's assertion that the  owner  should  be  directed  to
     submit leases or rent ledgers for all comparable apartments, the owner  is
     required to document the initial stabilized rent and to document that  the
     initial rent is not subject to  challenge  by  submitting  either  a  DC-2
     Notice or apartment registration form with proof of service on the  tenant
     or by indicating that the initial rent had  been  challenged.   Additional
     documentation in the form of leases or rent ledgers is not required.   The
     owner submitted the required documentation for the  comparable  apartments
     listed above, including DC-2 notices or apartment registration forms  with
     proof of service, as well as Landlord's Reports  of  Statutory  Decontrol.
     In addition, the owner submitted a copy of a DHCR order for apartment  16B
     at 425 W. 23rd Street affirming the initial rent of $1200.00 and indicated 
     that a CAB order had established an initial rent of $596.58 for  apartment
     2B at 425 W. 23rd Street.  Therefore no further documentation is  required
     for those apartments.The Commissioner rejects the tenant's assertion  that
     the building at 450 West 24th Street and 460  West  24th  Street  are  not
     comparable to the subject building  because  they  face  in  the  opposite
     direction and finds that the floor plans submitted by the  owner  indicate
     that the E line apartments are comparable to the  subject  line.   (It  is
     noted that the listing by the Administrator of a G line apartment  at  425
     West 23rd Street was an error.)

     The Commissioner finds that the Administrator failed to consider apartment 
     14B at 445 West 23rd Street which was cited by the tenant.  On remand, the 
     adjusted rent for that apartment should be considered by the Administrator 
     in the comparability study.  Regarding the  B  line  apartments  in  other
     buildings cited by the tenant in his April 25, 1990 submission, the tenant 
     failed  to  cite  those  apartments  during  the  proceeding  before   the
     Administrator and may not do so  for  the  first  time  on  administrative
     appeal.

     It is noted that the  major  capital  improvement  increase  under  Docket
     Number AI 430095-OM cited by the owner has an effective date  of  November
     1, 1986 for rent stabilized  tenants  rather  than  November  1,  1988  as
     stated by the Administrator.








          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
     It is further noted that DHCR records indicate that the 1984 Maximum  Base
     Rent (MBR) for the subject apartment was $404.9.  This  is  calculated  as
     follows:

               $326.27        1980 MBR
                X 1.11
               $362.16        1982 MBR
               X 1.075
               $389.32        1984 MBR
               + $6.81        Labor Cost Adjustment 10/6/81 2AOM30836
               + $2.00        Elevator Modernization 5/28/82 2A C415542
               + $6.79        Labor Cost adjustment 7/18/83 2AOM39963
               $404.92        Adjusted 1984 MBR

     On remand the 1984 MBR of $404.92 should be utilized  in  calculating  the
     fair market rent.  This figure does not include the fuel  cost  adjustment
     of $13.82.

     The record in this case indicates that after the proceeding was terminated 
     by the Administrator based on the tenant's withdrawal, the  tenant  sought
     to negate the settlement and requested reopening  of  the  proceeding  and
     processing  of  the  case  on  the  merits,  which  was  granted  by   the
     Administrator.  The tenant cannot now, after the determination of the fair 
     market rent by the Administrator, seek to nullify that  determination  and
     reinstitute the  settlement.   The  owner  should  not  be  penalized  for
     charging the tenant rent consistent with the  settlement  agreement  which
     was abrogated by the tenant, particularly in a  fair  market  rent  appeal
     case where the fair market rent could not readily  be  determined  by  the
     owner prior to the issuance of the Administrator's order.  On  remand  the
     fair market rent should be established based on  the  statutory  criteria,
     and should not be limited to  the  rent  actually  paid  pursuant  to  the
     abrogated settlement agreement.  If the fair market  rent  established  by
     the Administrator  exceeds  the  rent  paid  pursuant  to  the  settlement
     agreement, the owner will be entitled to retroactively  collect  the  rent
     consistent with  the  Administrator's  order  and  the  tenant  should  be
     afforded a reasonable period of time within which to repay any arrears.

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























          DOCKET NUMBER: DL 410018-RO AND DL 410005-RT
     ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be and the same hereby is  granted  in
     part, the owner's petition be and the  same  hereby  is  granted  and  the
     proceeding be and the same hereby is remanded to  the  Rent  Administrator
     for further processing in accordance with this  order  and  opinion.   The
     refund of arrears owed by either party as a result of Rent Administrator's 
     order is hereby stayed until a new order is issued upon remand.   However,
     the Administrator's determination as to the rent is not stayed  and  shall
     remain in effect, except for any adjustments pursuant to  lease  renewals,
     until the Administrator issues a new Order upon remand.

     ISSUED:






                                                                   
                                     ELLIOT SANDER
                                     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