FD410129.RT
                                  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. FD410129RT
                
               
               Melvyn L. Meer,                :  DRO DOCKET NO.ZDB410004RV 
                                                   
                                                 FORMER   OWNER:    Pearce,
                                                 Urstadt,  Mayer  &   Greer

                               PETITIONER     :
          ------------------------------------X

             ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On April 4, 1991 the above named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition 
          for Administrative Review against an order issued on March 8, 1991 
          by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,  New
          York concerning housing accommodations known as Apartment 17H  at
          201 East 19th  Street,  New  York,  New  York  wherein  the  Rent
          Administrator terminated the tenant's complaint that  the  former
          owner had failed to offer a proper renewal lease.

          The issue in this appeal is whether the Rent Administrator's order 
          was warranted.

          This proceeding was originally commenced by the filing in February, 
          1989 of a complaint by the tenant that  the  (former)  owner  had
          offered a renewal lease which did not reflect  a  rent  reduction
          order in Docket No. L3114599-R, issued on February 1, 1988.

          On February 7, 1991 the tenant was sent a form asking whether the 
          complaint had been resolved to his satisfaction so that he wished 
          to withdraw his  complaint, or whether his complaint had not been 
          resolved.  He indicated the former, so an order was issued on March 
          8, 1991 terminating the proceeding.  (For  some  reason  a  Final
          Request for Information asking the same thing was mailed to him on 
          April 3, 1991, after the order was issued and on the same day that 
          he mailed his appeal to the DHCR.  The tenant indicated on the form 
          that his complaint had not been resolved.)



















          FD410129.RT



          In this  petition  the  tenant  contends  in  substance  that  he
          inadvertently checked the wrong response on the form sent to him on 
          February 7, 1991; that his complaint has  not  been  resolved  as
          nothing has been done regarding his lease renewal, and  that  the
          proceeding should be restored.

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

          Aside from the fact that the Administrator's order was correct on 
          the basis of the record in existence  when  it  was  issued,  the
          Commissioner notes that an order was issued on July  2,  1993  in
          Docket No.GL410109RT, finding no overcharge through February  28,
          1989 by upholding an order which had overtirned the order that the 
          tenant used as a basis for refusing to sign the proferred renewal 
          lease.  While the tenant may end up challenging that recent order 
          in court, such proceeding could determine the rent upon which the 
          renewal offer should be based.  There would in any  event  be  no
          reason for this order to direct the owner to offer a lease based on 
          any rent other than that upheld in Docket No.GL410109-RT, and the 
          owner has already made such an offer, which the tenant refused to 
          sign.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          it is 

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