Adm. Review Docket Nos.: FF 510067-RO; FF 530069-RO 
                                 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 NOS.: FF 510067 RO 
                                            :               FF 530069 RO
             WAN SOO KIM,
                                               DRO DOCKET NO.: DL 530044 B  
                                            :
                                               SUBJECT PREMISES:
                              PETITIONER    :      172 Nagle Avenue
        ------------------------------------X      New York, New York 10034
          
           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On June 10, 1991, the above-named  owner  filed  two  petitions  for
        administrative review of an order issued on May 8,  1991  concerning
        the housing accommodations relating to  the  above-described  docket
        number.  Because the owner's petitions involve the  same  issues  of
        law and fact, said petitions are consolidated into  this  Order  and
        Opinion.

        The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has 
        carefully considered that portion of  the  record  relevant  to  the
        issue raised by the petition.

        On December 26,  1989,  the  tenant  commenced  this  proceeding  by
        filing a complaint asserting that the owner had failed  to  maintain
        security in the subject building, to quote, that "door  to  building
        has no lock."

        In its answer filed on February 2, 1990, the owner asserted that  it
        had not only repaired the  lock  of  the  building  front  door  but
        improved it with an intercom system; and that the tenants,  however,
        continually vandalized the building front door lock everytime it  is
        repaired.

        Thereafter on March 7, 1991, an inspection of the subject  apartment
        was conducted by a D.H.C.R. inspector who confirmed the existence of 
        defective conditions.

        The Administrator directed on May 8, 1991 the restoration  of  these
        services.

        In this consolidated petition, the owner states  in  substance  that
        repairs have been perfomed.

        After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
        the petition should be denied.

        The owner's petition does not make clear whether it is  the  owner's
        contention that repairs had been made before the apartment was 
        inspected or before the order was issued, or whether the  contention
        is that repairs were made following the issuance of the Rent 
        Administrator's order.  If it is the former, then the owner's 







        Adm. Review Docket Nos.: FF 510067-RO; FF 530069-RO 
        allegation is belied by the report of the agency inspector.   If  it
        is the latter, then the Rent Administrator's order reducing the rent 
        was nevertheless correct when  issued,  and  this  order  is  issued
        without prejudice to the owner filing an application for restoration 
        of services.

        THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization  Law  and  Code
        and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is

        ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,  and
        that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby 
        is, affirmed.

        ISSUED:




                                                                      
                                        ELLIOT SANDER
                                        Deputy Commissioner