Defendant's bald denial of receiving the default judgment in 2012 was insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service created by the affirmation of service by plaintiff's attorney (see De La Barrera v Handler, 290 AD2d 476 [2002]; M. Sobol, Inc. v Wiener, 3 Misc 3d 132[A], 2004 NY Slip Op 50409[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2004]). Thus, to the extent defendant sought to vacate the default judgment pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (1), her motion was untimely because it was not made within one yearafter service upon her of a copy of the default judgment with notice of its entry (see Yung Chong Ho v Uppal, 130 AD3d 811, 812 [2015]; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v White, 110 AD3d 759 [2013]).