| Matter of 462 Amsterdam, LLC v New York State Div. of Hous. &Community Renewal |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 03051 [61 AD3d 553] |
| April 21, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of 462 Amsterdam, LLC, Appellant, v NewYork State Division of Housing and Community Renewal,Respondent. |
—[*1] Gary R. Connor, New York (Christina S. Ossi of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered April 25, 2008,which denied petitioner owner's application to annul respondent Division of Housing andCommunity Renewal's (DHCR) determination of a rent overcharge in the amount of $7,130 andtreble damages in the amount of $21,690, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed,without costs.
The determination that the value of petitioner's claimed costs for improvements on thesubject apartment was $36,890, rather than $51,000, was rationally based upon the record, andwas neither arbitrary nor capricious (see Matter of BN Realty Assoc. v State of N.Y. Div. ofHous. & Community Renewal, 254 AD2d 7 [1998], lv denied 93 NY2d 806 [1999]).The $7,130 in overcharges was rationally based upon a 1995 rent reduction order which was ineffect at the relevant time. Finally, where the ownership of the property had remained continuousand petitioner was in fact aware of this order, the DHCR had a rational basis for concluding thatthe owner failed to establish that the overcharge was not willful or negligent, and thus, forimposing treble damages (see Matter ofTockwotten Assoc. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 7 AD3d453, 455 [2004]).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.Concur—Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Catterson, Renwick and Freedman, JJ. [See2008 NY Slip Op 31195(U).]