FI 610086 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.: FI-610086 RO
DRO DOCKET NO.: AA-601331 R
TENANT: BELLE ALEXANDER
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 16, 1991, the above-named petitioner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
August 12, 1991 by the District Rent Administrator, Jamaica, New
York, concerning housing accommodations known as Apartment No.
1C, 216 Bolton Street, Bronx, 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 issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order was
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 of a fair
market rent appeal application by the tenant challenging the
initial legal regulated rent. The tenant took occupancy pursuant
to a lease commencing October 1, 1985 and expiring September 30,
1987 at a monthly rent of $400.00.
The owner was served with a copy of the application and was
afforded an opportunity to submit rent data for comparable
In Order Number ZAA 601331 R, the District Rent Administrator
adjusted the initial legal regulated rent by establishing a fair
market rent of $356.34 effective October 1, 1985, the
commencement date of the initial rent stabilized lease, and
directed the owner to refund to the tenant of excess rent in the
amount of $3,585.96.
In this petition, the owner contends that the District Rent
Administrator's Order is incorrect and should be modified because
apartments 2C and 4C should not have been used in the
FI 610086 RO
comparability study since the apartments were not originally
rented with consideration that those there apartments would be
used in a comparability study.
The tenant did not submit a response to the owners petition.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied. The owner failed to give a legal reason why the
information that it provided the Division should not be used in a
comparability study. The very purpose of the comparability study
is to use other comparable apartments provided by the owner. The
proper procedure was followed in the instant case.
The owner is directed to roll back the rent to the lawful
stabilized rents consistent with this decision and to refund or
fully credit against future rents over a period not exceeding six
months from the date of receipt of this order, the excess rent
collected by the owner.
In the event the owner does not take appropriate action to comply
within sixty (60) days from the date of this order, the tenant
may credit the excess rent collected by the owner against the
next month(s) rent until fully offset.
Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through
August 31, 1991, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent
rents to an amount no greater than that determined by this order
plus any lawful increases and to register any adjusted rents with
this order and opinion being given as the explanation for the
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and the
same hereby is, denied, and that the order of the District Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner