Opinion
July 10, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the petitioner's contentions on appeal, the determination of the respondent State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Office of Rent Administration that she had overcharged the complaining tenant on rent was neither arbitrary nor capricious nor an abuse of discretion (see, Matter of Ansonia Residents Assocs. v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 75 N.Y.2d 206; Matter of Fanelli v. New York City Conciliation Appeals Bd., 90 A.D.2d 756, affd 58 N.Y.2d 952). Further, once it was properly determined that such overcharges had occurred, the burden shifted to the petitioner to establish that they were not willful (see, Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 26-516 [a]; Matter of Wai Leung Chan v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 207 A.D.2d 552). Having failed to meet this burden, the petitioner was properly penalized treble damages (see, Matter of Wai Leung Chan v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, supra). Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.