IA210078RO
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
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: IA210078RO
Guiseppe D'Arancio, DRO DOCKET NO.: ZDA210048R
TENANT: Bruno Lisciotto
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for Administrative
Review against an order issued on May 21, 1993 by the Rent
Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York concerning
housing accommodations known as Apartment 3R at 1567 Bath Avenue,
Brooklyn, New York wherein the Rent Administrator determined that the
owner had overcharged the tenant.
The proceeding was originally commenced by the filing in January, 1989
of a rent overcharge complaint by the tenant, in which he stated he had
commenced occupancy on March 15, 1986 at a rent of $400.00 per month.
In answer, the owner contended that the subject premises was a five-
family house, and was therefore exempt from rent stabilization. He
submitted a Certificate of Occupancy dated November 5, 1969 showing the
building as consisting of five units. The record shows that the tenant
herein vacated the subject apartment prior to the issuance of the Rent
administrator's order.
In an order issued on May 21, 1993 the Administrator determined an
overcharge of $17,214.21, since the owner had defaulted on both the
rental history and the proof of registration.
In his petition, the owner contends among other things that the building
is a five-family home which does not have to be registered with the
DHCR.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be granted.
A building with six or more units and subject to rent stabilization on
the stabilization base date generally remains subject to the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code even if the number of units is later reduced
below six. A building completed after February 1, 1947 and prior to
March 10, 1969 would generally have become subject to stabilization by
virtue of the Rent Stabilization Law of 1969, and as such would have a
stabilization base date of May 31, 1968 or the date it was completed,
whichever was later. In the present case DHCR records show that there
were six rent controlled apartments in 1943. Since the building was
completed prior to February 1, 1947, it had been subject only to rent
IA210078RO
control, and apartments becoming vacant on or after July 1, 1971 became
exempt from any rent regulation. It was only with the passage of the
Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974 that the building was
potentially liable for stabilization. However, on the June 30, 1974
stabilization base date of the ETPA, the building had only five
apartments, and never contained more than five apartments subsequent to
the June 30, 1974 base date. Therefore, none of the apartments have
ever been stabilized. The DHCR therefore had no authority to regulate
the subject apartment. (It is not rent stabilized, and it is also not
rent controlled since the subject apartment was vacated after June 30,
1971 prior to the initial occupancy of the tenant herein.)
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it
is.
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted and that
the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, revoked in
accordance with this order and opinion.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
