HK410017RP
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 S.J.R. NO. 6644
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.HK410017RP
: (GH510037RO)
DRO DOCKET NO.ZEA510399R
CAROLYN MAITLAND TENANT: JUANITA COLBERT
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
In August, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on July
9, 1992, by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street,
Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
611 West 145th Street, New York, New York, Apartment No. 3F, wherein
the Rent Administrator determined that the owner had overcharged the
tenant.
On September 3, 1992, the Commissioner issued an order
dismissing the owner's petition on the basis that it was not timely
filed.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner-owner filed a petition in
the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law
and Rules requesting that the order of the Commissioner be annulled.
The proceeding was then remitted to consider the petition as timely
and to decide it on the merits.
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
warranted.
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 commenced in January, 1990, by the filing
of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant. A copy of the
complaint was served on the owner and in response, the owner (niece
of previous owner) stated in substance that the tenant was not being
overcharged and had not paid a rent increase in many years.
In Docket Number ZEA510399R, the Rent Administrator determined
that the tenant had been overcharged in the amount of $2723.10
including treble damages.
HK410017RP
In this petition, the owner alleges in substance that in 1990
the owner of the building suffered a loss in the amount of $7,520.00
and in 1991 a loss in the amount of $5,545.00; that the rent
increase was not done to penalize the tenant but done with the
intent to decrease the owner's expenses; and that even with the rent
increase to the tenant, the owner is losing money at such a rapid
rate that there are no potential buyers willing to purchase the
subject premises.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
The apartment herein is subject to the Rent Stabilization Law
and Code and rent increases are limited to those permitted by said
Law and Code. The fact that an owner may be losing money on a
building is not a permissible reason to increase the rent of a rent
stabilized apartment unless the owner has applied for a hardship
rent increase and been granted same pursuant to Section 2522.4(b) or
(c) of the Rent Stabilization Code. In the instant case, the owner
has not made such an application so that the Rent Administrator's
order finding a rent overcharge was warranted.
The owner is directed to reflect the findings and
determinations made in this order on all future registration
statements, including those for the current year if not already
filed, citing this order as the basis for the change. Registration
statements already on file, however, should not be amended to
reflect the findings and determinations made in this order. The
owner is further directed to adjust subsequent rents to an amount no
greater than that determined by this order plus any lawful
increases.
The Commissioner has determined in this Order and Opinion that
the owner collected overcharges of $2723.10. This Order may, upon
expiration of the period for seeking review of this Order and
Opinion pursuant to Article Seventy-eight of the Civil Practice Law
and Rules, be filed and enforced as a judgment or not in excess of
twenty percent per month of the overcharge may be offset against any
rent thereafter due the owner. Where the tenant credits the
overcharge, the tenant may add to the overcharge, or where the
tenant files this Order as a judgment, the County Clerk may add to
the overcharge, interest at the rate payable on a judgment pursuant
to section 5004 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules from the
issuance date of the Rent Administrator's Order to the issuance date
of the Commissioner's Order.
HK410017RP
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.
ISSUED
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
