GF210001RO
                                  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    SJR No.6398
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :    ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                                DOCKET NO.GF210001RO
                                              :    DRO DOCKET NO.CJ210168R
              Arnold Rosenshein,
                                                   TENANT: Holly Hudson

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

           ORDER AND OPINION TERMINATING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                       AND MODIFYING THE ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER

          On June 1, 1992, the  above-named  owner  filed  a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on September 3, 1991 by a 
          District Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations 
          knowns as 519 8th Street, Apartment 3L, Brooklyn, New York wherein 
          the Rent Administrator determined that the owner had  overcharged
          the tenant.

          On June 2, 1992, the  Commissioner  dismissed  the  petition  for
          administrative review as untimely.

          Subsequently, the owner filed a petition in Supreme Court pursuant 
          to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules seeking judicial 
          review of the Commissioner's order.

          This proceeding was commenced on October 7, 1988 by the filing of 
          an overcharge complaint.  The tenant stated that  she  had  taken
          occupancy of the subject apartment on June 1, 1988 at a rental of 
          $1,196.28 per month.  In his answer the  owner  alleged  that  no
          overcharges occurred based on vacancy improvements  made  in  the
          subject apartment.  

          In the order here under review, the Administrator determined that 
          the owner had failed to register the subject building for the year 
          1984 and failed to  produce  a  rental  history  of  the  subject
          apartment from the base date of April 1, 1980.  The Administrator 
          used  the  default  procedure  and  concluded  that  the   lawful
          stabilization rent was $369.36 beginning June 1, 1988 and froze the 
          rent.  Because of this determination, claimed vacancy improvements 
          were not considered by the Administrator and the total overcharges 
          were determined to be $62,121.96 including treble damages through 
          May 31, 1990.


          GF210001RO












          GF210001RO



          In its petition for administrative review which had been dismissed 
          as untimely, the owner had produced evidence of having  filed  an
          initial registration form in 1984 and alleged that the petition was 
          timely because he had never received a copy of the Administrator's 
          order.  The owner alleged that when he first became aware of  the
          Administrator's order he filed the  petition  for  administrative
          review in a timely manner.  With the  petition  the  owner  again
          included evidence of vacancy improvements.

          During the pendancy of the Article 78 proceeding in Kings  County
          Supreme Court a stipulation of settlement was entered into by all 
          the parties including the complainant-tenant, the current tenant, 
          the petitioner-owner and the Division of  Housing  and  Community
          Renewal (DHCR).  Pursuant to the stipulation of  settlement,  the
          DHCR found sufficient proof to establish that the subject apartment 
          was registered in 1984 and all subsequent years through 1989  and
          the lawful stabilization  rent  for  the  subject  apartment  was
          established at $1,000.00 per month effective June 1, 1988.   This
          rental amount would include all vacancy improvements made by  the
          owner.

          A separate agreement between the complainant-tenant and petitioner- 
          owner was entered into which settled the arrearges.

          Accordingly, all of the issues raised in this case by the petition 
          for administrative review  are  moot  and  the  elements  of  the
          stipulation of settlement as described above are incorporated into 
          this order and opinion.

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

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, terminated, 
          and that the Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby  is,
          modified in accordance with this order and opinion.




          ISSUED:





           
                                                         JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA 
                                                         Deputy Comissioner
                                                                   
    

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