Docket No.:  FD 410322 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.: FD 410322 RO
                                                
            ANTHONY PAGAN,                       DRO DOCKET NO.: L-000389-R
           
                                PETITIONER       TENANT: James Simmons
          ----------------------------------X                           
            
            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above-named petitioner-owner timely  refiled  a  Petition  for
          Administrative Review against an order of the  Rent  Administrator
          issued  October   18,   1990.    The   order   concerned   housing
          accommodations known as Apartment 13  located  at  1571/2  Stanton
          Street, New York, N.Y.  The Administrator found  that  the  tenant
          had  been  overcharged  and  computed  the  total  overcharges  as
          $76,123.73 including treble damages and excess security.

          The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully  considered
          that portion relevant to the issues raised by this appeal.

          The tenant commenced  this  proceeding  by  filing  an  overcharge
          complaint on January 28, 1985 in which he indicated that  the  had
          not received an apartment registration.   The  tenant  claimed  he
          took occupancy of the apartment on September 10, 1984 at a  rental
          of $475.00 per month.  The tenant  stated  that  he  believed  the
          landlord was overcharging "based on the location and size  of  the
          apartment."

          The owner was properly served with a  copy  of  the  complaint  on
          February 26, 1985.  On October 8 and November 5,  1987  the  owner
          was requested to submit a copy of the apartment registration (form 
          RR-1) together with proof of service.   In  the  absence  of  such
          proof the owner was directed to submit all leases since  April  1,
          1980.

          The owner answered on November 12, 1987 and  stated  that  it  had
          submitted a prior answer on October  28,  1987.   A  copy  of  the
          October 28 answer was enclosed which included copies of  the  1984
          and 1985 rent registrations and certificates  of  mailing  by  the
          Rent Stabilization Association of the 1985 and 1986 registrations.

          The Administrator advised the owner that the November 12  response
          did not include the 1984 proof of service  and  an  additional  20
          days was afforded the owner to submit the additional evidence.  On 
          November 20, 1987  the  owner  made  a  further  submission  which
          consisted of  the  documents  submitted  on  November  12  and  an
          affidavit of service by the Rent Stabilization Association stating 
          that the apartment registration forms were served on  all  tenants
          of the subject building on February 20, 1985.

          On December 7, 1987 and January 29, 1988 the owner was directed to 






          Docket No.:  FD 410322 RO

          submit complete copies of all leases  from  July  1,  1975.   This
          request was an  attempt  to  substantiate  the  vacancy  allowance
          claimed pursuant to Rent  Guidelines  Board  Order  No.  15.   The
          Administrator also requested a copy of the 1984  registration  and
          proof of service.  On April 21, 1988  the  owner  resubmitted  its
          November 20, 1987 submission.

          The Administrator sent a notice to the owner, on October 31, 1988, 
          advising that it had not submitted proof of service of the Initial 
          Rent Registration form on the tenant and, as a  result,  a  rental
          history for the subject apartment from April 1, 1980 was required. 
          A Final Notice of  Pending  Default  was  sent  to  the  owner  on
          September 24, 1990 advising the owner that copies  of  all  leases
          had not been submitted.  The notice explained how the  rent  would
          be determined if the required information was not submitted within 
          20 days.  The owner was also informed that treble damages would be 
          imposed.  The owner responded, on October 1, 1990, with copies  of
          leases dating from April 1983.

          The Administrator  found  the  owner  to  be  in  default  of  the
          obligation to  provide  a  rental  history  from  April  1,  1980.
          Utilizing accepted DHCR  default  procedures,  the  initial  legal
          regulated rent was established at $103.09, the  lowest  stabilized
          rent for the same size apartment in the building, and  frozen  for
          the period from August 17, 1984 to August 16, 1989.  Finding  that
          the resulting overcharge was  willful  the  Administrator  imposed
          treble damages.  A total overcharge  of  $76,123.73  was  computed
          including excess security.

          On appeal the owner states that it believes  the  tenant  was  not
          overcharged  and  that  it  would  "submit  all  lease(s)  in  the
          conference."  The tenant did not file a response.

          After careful consideration of the  evidence  in  the  record  the
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

          The Commissioner  finds  that  the  owner's  grounds  for  appeal,
          without  more,  do  not  provide  any  basis  for  modifying   the
          Administrator's order.  No valid grounds for  reversal  have  been
          offered.  While a hearing may be granted in exceptional cases this 
          proceeding does not present any  need  for  the  conference  which
          petitioner makes reference to.  The Commissioner has reviewed  the
          Administrator's processing of this proceeding and finds  that  the
          owner was given numerous opportunities over a protected period  of
          time to produce the required information.  The Administrator acted 
          in full accord with established  procedures  and,  according,  the
          order appealed from is affirmed.






          Docket No.:  FD 410322 RO


          THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is

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

          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