Having failed to exhaust her administrative remedies or commence a CPLR article 78 proceeding, defendant cannot, in this plenary judicial action, collaterally attack the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal's (DHCR) order finding that excessive rent was charged (see, Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 N.Y.2d 52). Moreover, defendant's bare assertion that she did not file a Petition for Administrative Review with the agency because she never received the agency's order does not overcome the presumption of receipt raised by the DHCR clerical and mailroom personnel's affidavits setting forth routine office procedures (Woodner Co. v Higgins, 179 A.D.2d 444, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 756).
We have reviewed defendant's constitutional challenges, and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.