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 S.J.R. NO. 7219
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.EA210300RO
: DRO DOCKET NO.DK210001RP
DOUBLE A PROPERTIES ASSOC. K3102343RT
TENANT: FIZUL & JUDITH AZEEZ
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 30, 1990, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
December 27, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall
Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations
known as 60 Turner Place, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment No. 2J,
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
warranted.
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 and a fair market rent
appeal by the tenants who stated that they had first moved to the
subject apartment in April, 1976 at a rental of $265.00 per month.
In response, the owner advised that it had purchased the subject
premises during a foreclosure proceeding and was unable to supply a
rental history prior to April, 1976. The owner further advised that
the subject building had been constructed in the 1960's and was
never subject to rent control. DHCR records indicate that the
subject building was never subject to rent control. Therefore the
tenants were not eligible to file a fair market rent appeal.
In Order Number DK210001RP, 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 $4,792.99
and directed the owner and prior owner to refund such overcharge to
EA210300RO
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 it
bought the subject premises in foreclosure.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
granted.
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
EA210300RO
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. It is noted that the rent charged on April 1,
1980 was $288.85 (not $285.00 as incorrectly listed in the Rent
Administrator's rent calculation chart). The rent was then
correctly increased by 16% to $335.00 pursuant to a three year lease
renewal effective April 1, 1982. Therefore, the Rent
Administrator's order finding a rent overcharge must be revoked.
The record also indicates that the tenants vacated the subject
apartment in October, 1987.
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.
ISSUED
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
EA210300RO
|
