Docket No. FB430069RO
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.: FB430069RO
Rebecca Chang ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 52 West 69th Street, Various Apartments,
New York, New York.
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 issue before the Commissioner is whether the
Administrator's order was correct.
The Administrator's order being appealed, EH420001BO was issued
on January 18, 1991. In that order, the Administrator denied the
finding of BK424827BR, issued July 14, 1988, that the owner be
granted eligibility for a 1988/89 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) increase.
The Administrator specifically found that there was an outstanding
finding of harassment at the subject premises, and that the owner
could thus not be granted eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject
On appeal, the owner contends that there is no harassment of
tenants at the subject premises. In support of this contention the
owner submits on appeal a Certificate of No Harassment
(certificate) issued by the New York City Department of Housing
Preservation and Development (HPD), and the Court order upon which
the HPD relied in issuing its Certificate.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
On August 11, 1987 a finding of harassment was made at the
Docket No. FB430069RO
subject premises by the DHCR. This finding is still outstanding as
of the issue date of this order. Section 2202.6(a)(3) of the New
York City Rent and Eviction Regulations allows the Administrator to
withhold rent increases from owners of premises at which there is
a finding of harassment.
The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that the Administrator
was correct in overturning its previous finding of eligibility, and
finding that the owner was thus ineligible for an MBR increase at
the subject premises.
The certificate and the court order submitted by the owner on
appeal are not relevant to the instant proceeding. The DHCR makes
findings of harassment and nonharassment at particular premises
pursuant to New York City and State Rent Regulations. The HPD
makes similar findings pursuant to other statutes. The DHCR
finding of nonharassment in the instant proceeding was thus made
pursuant to different regulations than an HPD finding of
nonharassment would be. As such, an HPD finding of no harassment
at a particular premises cannot negate a DHCR finding of harassment
at that premises.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and that the order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
Joseph A. D'Agosta