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.GD410133RO
AMG Properties Co. : DRO DOCKET NO.CD410257R
TENANT: Ping Ping Qiu
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 17, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on April
3, 1992, by the Rent Administrator concerning the housing
accommodations known as 779 Riverside Drive, New York, New York,
Apartment No.B50, wherein the Rent Administrator determined that
the owner had overcharged the tenant.
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 in April
1988 of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant who took
occupancy on June 1, 1987 pursuant to a lease commencing on June 1,
1987 and expiring on November 30, 1988, at a monthly rental of
$585.00, increasing to $620.10 monthly on December 1, 1987. The
tenant stated, among other things, that her initial rent of $585.00
represented an overcharge.
During the pendency of this complaint, on September 11, 1991, the
DHCR issued an Order Reducing Maximum/Legal Regulated Rent (Docket
No.CI410369S), reducing the legal regulated rent by the percentage
of the most recent guidelines adjustment for the tenant's lease
commencing before November 1, 1988, the effective date of the rent
reduction. The order further provided that no rent increase may be
collected after the effective date of that order until issuance of
a rent restoration order.
On April 3, 1992, in the herein-appealed order, the Administrator
found, based upon the rent reduction effective November 1, 1988,
that the owner had overcharged the tenant a total of $4,012.57, and
directed the owner to roll back the rent to the legal regulated
rent, and to refund the amount of the overcharge to the tenant. On
May 8, 1992 the rent reduction was revoked by an order granting the
owner's petition for administrative review (Docket Number
In this petition, submitted on April 17, 1992 and amended on May
15, 1992, the owner stated that by order dated May 8, 1992 the
Commissioner revoked the Administrator's order reducing and
freezing the rent under Docket No. CI410369S; that the overcharge
found in the herein-appealed order was based solely on that order;
and that, accordingly, the finding of overcharge should be revoked.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
The revocation, ab initio, of the rent reduction order, Docket No.
CI410369S, eliminates any overcharge of this tenant. Accordingly,
the Commissioner finds that the Administrator's order should be
If the owner has already complied with the Rent Administrator's
order and there are arrears due to the owner as a result of the
instant determination, the tenant shall be permitted to pay off the
arrears in twenty four equal monthly installments. Should the
tenant vacate after the issuance of this order or have already
vacated, said arrears shall be payable immediately.
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, granted, that the order of the Rent Administrator
be, and the same hereby is, revoked and it is determined that the
tenant was not overcharged.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA