This Court has previously found that DHCR's determination to close petitioner's harassment complaint was not an abuse of discretion, and that a proceeding challenging its determination of February 8, 2000, which granted defendant landlord's application for a service and rent reduction, was time-barred ( 292 A.D.2d 164, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 757). Supreme Court properly declined to entertain petitioner's claims against the Department of Buildings on the ground that he had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies ( Matter of Perrotta v. City of New York, 107 A.D.2d 320, affd 66 N.Y.2d 859).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.