Ordered that the first order dated August 29, 1996, is affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the second order dated August 29, 1996, is dismissed, as no appeal lies from an order issued ex parte ( see, Shaikh v. Getty Petroleum Corp., 240 A.D.2d 651); and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
In order to establish entitlement to vacatur of a default in interposing an answer, the defendant must establish the existence of a reasonable excuse and a meritorious defense ( see, Putney v. Pearlman, 203 A.D.2d 333; Gamache v. Ahern, 52 A.D.2d 836). There is no merit to the appellants' purported defense of usury based upon a provision in the mortgage involved in this case increasing the interest to a higher rate upon a default in payment ( see, Shorehaven Assocs. v. King, 184 A.D.2d 764; Klapper v. Integrated Agric. Mgt. Co., 149 A.D.2d 765).
The appellants' remaining contentions are similarly without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.