EJ 710252-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
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                            DOCKET NO.: EJ 710252 RO
                                                           
               The Bechtoldt Corp.,            DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR
                                               DOCKET NO.: EE-710305-R
           
                                   PETITIONER               
          -----------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On October  22,  1990,  the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed
          Petition  for  Administrative  Review  of  an  order  issued   on
          September 18,  1990,  by  the  District  Rent  Administrator,  50
          Clinton  Street,   Hempstead,   New   York   concerning   housing
          accommodations known as  Apartment  C25,  100  Jerusalem  Avenue,
          Hempstead, New  York  wherein  the  District  Rent  Administrator
          determined, among other things, that there was no  evidence  that
          the  owner  had  complied  with  Section  48(b)  of  the   Tenant
          Protection Regulations, and  assessed  the  owner  a  penalty  of
          $250.00.

          The  issue  under   appeal   is   whether   the   District   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 issues raised by the administrative appeal.

          This proceeding was commenced by the filing of a rent  overcharge
          complaint by the tenant on May 29,  1990,  in  which  the  tenant
          stated that he would like to know what the  previous  tenant  was
          paying in rent.  The tenant took occupancy pursuant  to  a  lease
          commencing June 1, 1989 and expiring  on  July  31,  1990,  at  a
          monthly rent of $654.15.

          The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and directed to 
          submit a copy  of  the  present  tenant's  lease  and  the  lease
          immediately prior thereto.  In response,  on  July  5,  1990  the
          owner submitted a copy of the 1989 apartment registration, and  a
          copy of the tenant's lease signed by  the  tenant  and  co-tenant
          including the statement "I have viewed the prior  tenant's  lease
          and the rent for same."

          On July 9, 1990 the owner's answer was mailed to the tenant  who,
          in a response dated July 25, 1990, stated that neither he nor the 
          co-tenant had seen or been offered  an  opportunity  to  see  the
          prior tenant's lease, and  further  contended  that  he  was  not
          aware, nor was he advised, that he had  the  right  to  see  that
          information.

          In response to an August 9, 1990 Division request for the  leases






          EJ 710252-RO
          of comparable apartments and for the pricing  sheet  showing  how
          the complaining tenant's initial rent was determined,  the  owner
          by answer submitted on August 29, 1990 alleged it  had  not  been
          provided with the  tenant's  response,  and  that  there  was  no
          increase from the prior tenant's rent and  therefore  the  matter
          should be terminated.  On August 30, 1990 the owner  was  sent  a
          final request for the  comparability  information,  and  for  the
          pricing sheet.

          By answer dated September 11, 1990 the owner submitted the  first
          page of the lease for the  highest  comparable  apartment,  along
          with  a  copy  of  the  1989  Apartment  Registration  for   that
          apartment, and resubmitted the first page of the present tenant's 
          lease, and of the prior tenant's renewal, stating that there  was
          no increase from the  prior  rent,  and  therefore  no  guideline
          increase determination.

          On September 18, 1990 the Administrator determined, under  Docket
          No. EE-710305-R, that  no  overcharge  existed;  established  the
          legal  regulated  rent  as  $686.86  per  month  for  the   lease
          commencing August  1,  1990  and  expiring  July  31,  1991;  and
          assessed a penalty of $250.00 on the owner, for failure to comply 
          with Section 48(b) of the Tenant Protection Regulations.

          In its petition requesting reversal, the owner  states  that  the
          tenant signed a statement acknowledging  having  seen  the  prior
          tenant's lease and rent for same; that the tenant denied same  in
          the complaint; that there was no increase from the  prior  lease;
          that Section 48(b) provides that the tenant must  see  the  prior
          lease and that any increase in rent must  be  in  writing  or  no
          increase will be allowed, and that pursuant to Section  48(b)  no
          increase of the prior rent should be the penalty.

          The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should  be
          denied.

          Section 48 (9 NYCRR 2503.8) of the Tenant Protection  Regulations
          provides, in pertinent part: (a) a landlord of a  vacant  housing
          accommodation for  lease  shall  make  available  to  prospective
          tenants a notice in writing of the monthly rent under the offered 
          lease, and of the prior legal regulated rent, if any,  which  was
          in effect immediately prior to the vacancy, and that any increase 
          in the prior legal regulated rent under the  offered  lease  does
          not exceed the applicable rate of rent adjustment pursuant to the 
          Guidelines filed by the Rent Guidelines Board,  or  as  otherwise
          authorized by the Act; and that (b) at the time of  renting,  the
          landlord shall attach this notice  in  writing  to  the  executed
          written lease, and deliver a copy of the  notice  to  the  tenant
          with a copy of the lease, or include a written provision  in  the
          lease setting forth the prior legal regulated rent, the amount of 
          any rent increase under the lease and showing that such  increase
          does not exceed the applicable rate of rent adjustment in  effect
          pursuant to the Guildelines filed by the Rent Guidelines Board or 
          as otherwise authorized by the Act.  In the  event  the  landlord
          does not comply with this requirement, the  lease  shall  not  be
          effective to increase the prior legal regulated rent.

          The Commissioner finds that  the  owner's  actions  were  not  in
          compliance with Section 48.  A mere showing of the prior lease to 






          EJ 710252-RO
          prospective tenants does not fulfill the requirements of  Section
          48(a), nor was any attachment made to the executed written lease, 
          nor written provision included in the  lease  as  required  under
          Section 48(b).

          The  determination  of  the  Administrator  was  appropriate,  as
          authorized  by  Section  72  (9  NYCRR  2506.2)  of  the   Tenant
          Protection Regulations, which states, in pertinent part, that "if 
          the Division finds that any landlord  had  knowingly  engaged  in
          acts prohibited by the  Act  and  Regulations  or  orders  issued
          thereunder, it may assess the landlord and order  it  to  pay  to
          each tenant affected  by  such  acts  the  reasonable  costs  and
          attorney fees of the proceeding plus a penalty not in  excess  of
          $250.00 for each such act."

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Emergency Tenant Protection Act 
          and the Tenant Protection Regulations, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  denied,
          and that the order of the District Rent Administrator be, and the 
          same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:

           
                                                       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