Under the circumstances presented, we conclude that the DHCR's extraordinary delay in rendering a decision in this matter was unreasonable and substantially prejudiced petitioner (landlord) to the extent that it froze tenant's rent beyond January 4, 1985 ( cf., Matter of Harris Assocs. v. deLeon, 84 N.Y.2d 698, 702). While the DHCR seeks to place fault for the delay in this more than a decade long proceeding upon landlord, the record fails to substantiate its claim. There was no causal connection between the DHCR's delay in rendering a decision and landlord's conduct. Accordingly, the matter should be remanded to the DHCR so that it may recalculate the overcharges. On remand, the DHCR shall determine the lawful increases that landlord was entitled to after January 4, 1985, and determine whether any amounts were collected in excess of such lawful increases.
Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Rosenberger, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.