GA 210062 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. GA 210062 RO
: DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
Ed Frohman, DOCKET NO. ZDK 210061 R
628 - 2nd Street Realty,
TENANT: John Pease
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 22, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order issued on December 19, 1991,
by the Rent Administrator, Gertz Plaza, 92-31 Union Hall Street,
Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 628
Second Street, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment No. 6, wherein the Rent
Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the tenant.
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the provisions
of Section 2526.1 of the Rent Stabilization Code.
The issue herein is whether the Rent 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 rent
overcharge complaint by the tenant in November 1989. The owner was
served with a copy of the tenant's complaint.
The owner failed to respond to the tenant's complaint.
In Order Number ZDK 210061 R, the Rent Administrator determined that
due to the owner's failure to submit a complete rental history, the
owner had collected a rent overcharge of $3569.40 including treble
damages on that portion of the overcharge occurring on and after April
Further, the Rent Administrator froze the rent established in the order
due to the owner's failure to completely register the subject apartment
for the years 1985 through 1991 and advised the owner that upon proper
registration the rents may be restored prospectively.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that on November 22,
GA 210062 RO
1991, it had advised the Rent Administrator that the prior tenant
occupied the apartment from January 1986 to October or November 1988 and
paid $700.00; it can provide several checks received from the prior
tenant and his name and phone number; the complainant's rent of $650.00
can not be an overcharge because it is less than the prior tenant's
rent; the current owner purchased the subject building about April 13,
1987 and was not aware of DHCR Rules and Regulations.
In answer to the owner's petition, the tenant stated in substance that
ignorance of DHCR regulations does not excuse the owner for overcharging
and questioned why the owner failed to state the prior rental history to
the Rent Administrator.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.
An examination of the record in this case discloses that the owner has
submitted no substantiation either in the proceeding before the Rent
Administrator or on appeal that it responded to the tenant's complaint
on November 22, 1991; no record of the owner's response is found in the
docket; the owner has offered no substantiation of his contentions
concerning the prior rent by the submission of rental documents nor
submitted proof that the apartment was timely and completely registered
with DHCR and the tenant served a copy of the initial registration.
Accordingly, the Rent Administrator's order was warranted.
Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through
November 30, 1989, the owner is cautioned to adjust subsequent rents to
an amount no greater than that determined by the Rent Administrator's
order plus any lawful increases, and to register any adjusted rents with
this order and opinion being given as the explanation for the
This order may, upon the expiration of the period in which the owner may
institute a proceeding pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law
and Rules, be filed and enforced in the same manner as a judgment or not
in excess of twenty percent per month thereof may be offset against any
rent thereafter due the owner.
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 Rent Administrator be, and
the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner