FH 610368 RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: FH 610368 RO
RALPH LANGSAM ASSOCIATES INC./ DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
JOHN DALE, DOCKET NO.: EB 610687-S
1809 Archer Street, Apt. No.21
Bronx, New York 10460
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely Petition for Administrative
Review of an order issued on July 29, 1991, concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to
the issues raised by the petition.
The tenant commenced the original proceeding below on February 26,
1990 by filing a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to
maintain numerous required services in the subject building.
In its answer filed on May 9, 1990, the owner asserted that at the
time of the tenant's complaint, the owner was the City of New
York; that DHCR has no jurisdiction; and that the complaint should
be referred to New York City's Department of Housing Preservation
Thereafter on July 11, 1990, the subject apartment was inspected
by DHCR which confirmed the existence of numerous defective
The parties were informed on December 11, 1990 of the inspection
In a response filed on January 18, 1991, the tenant informed DHCR
of the continued existence of defective conditions.
The subject apartment was again inspected by DHCR on June 27,
1991. DHCR confirmed the continued existence of defective
The Administrator directed on July 29, 1991 restoration of these
services and reduction of the stabilized rent.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that an answer
was submitted in the proceeding below, informing DHCR to refer the
FH 610368 RO
case to the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and
Development because DHCR had no jurisdiction over this building at
the filing of the tenant's complaint; that this building first
came under DHCR jurisdiction on April 24, 1991 when New York City
sold this property to the current owner.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be denied.
Although NYC was the owner at the filing of the tenant's complaint
on February 26, 1990, DHCR has jurisdiction. A deed submitted by
the owner shows that title passed from NYC to petitioner on April
24, 1990. Also, the petitioner answered on May 9, 1990 when title
already passed. In addition, this case could not have been
referred to HPD at the time of the two inspections on July 11,
1990 and June 27, 1991.
It is noted that the owner's assertion that the building first
came under DHCR jurisdiction on April 24, 1991 is belied by the
owner submitted deed indicating that title passed on April 24,
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA