GE 110137 RT
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.: GE 110137 RT
DRO DOCKET NO.: DC 130095 RV
PREMISES: 39-06 63RD STREET
WOODSIDE, NEW YORK
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 15, 1992, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order issued on April 17,
1992, by a Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodations known as 39-06 63rd Street, Woodside, New York,
Apartment No. 2C, wherein the Rent Administrator determined to
dismiss the tenant's complaint of the owner's failure to renew to
lease because the tenant failed to respond to the Division of
Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) request for information.
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
complaint by the tenant on March 20, 1989 that the owner had failed
to offer the tenant a renewal lease within the period prescribed by
law. The tenant also mentioned that the appeal of an order
awarding overcharges to the tenant was still pending.
The tenant took occupancy of the subject premises on April 1, 1981
at a rent of $275.00 per month under the Section 8 Program as
administered by the New York City Housing Authority.
In the order appealed herein, issued on April 17, 1992, the Rent
Administrator dismissed the tenant's complaint of lease renewal
because the tenant had failed to respond to the Administrator's
request for information. The order was issued without prejudice to
GE 110137 RT
the pending proceedings for rent "restoration" under Docket Numbers
CA 110248 RO and CL 110162 RO.
In her petition, the tenant protests the dismissal of the complaint
without resolving the issue of rent overcharges, and states that
she is still waiting for her refund of such rent overcharges, plus
The owner's answer was also exclusively concerned with the matter
of rent overcharges.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
The sole issue raised by the tenant in her petition is the
dismissal of the instant proceeding without resolving the issue of
the lawful rent, as was originally raised by the tenant when she
filed a fair market rent appeal. However, as specifically noted in
the order under review herein, the lawful rent issue has been
reviewed by the Commissioner in a separate appellate proceeding.
On September 18, 1992, the Commissioner issued an Order and Opinion
under Docket Number CA 110248 RO, wherein the tenant's fair market
rent appeal was remanded to the Rent Administrator for a new
determination. The tenant will be advised of the status of this
proceeding separately, and has lost no rights to the remedies due
her, if any, by the dismissal of the instant case. The other
appellate proceeding, under Docket Number CL 110162 RO, concerns a
rent reduction for service violations, and is awaiting review by
the Commissioner. This opinion is also issued without prejudice to
the tenant's rights in that case.
It is also noted that the tenant remains eligible for all
protection vouchsafed under the RSC even though she does not at
present have a lease.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner