Opinion
December 12, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Milano, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (hereinafter the DHCR) has the authority, inter alia, to amend the Rent Stabilization Code and promulgate regulations to properly implement such an amendment (see, Rent Stabilization Assn. v Higgins, 83 N.Y.2d 156, cert denied ___ US ___, 114 S Ct 2693; Matter of Versailles Realty Co. v New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 76 N.Y.2d 325).
In affirming the order of the District Rent Administrator, dated October 26, 1988, the DHCR vacated an earlier order of the District Rent Administrator, dated August 29, 1986, which had dismissed a prior rent overcharge complaint by the same tenant. The DHCR properly applied Rent Stabilization Code § 2527.8 ( 9 NYCRR 2527.8) by vacating the order dated August 29, 1986, since the DHCR properly found that the August 29, 1986, order constituted an irregularity in a vital matter (see, Matter of Silverstein v Higgins, 184 A.D.2d 644), because neither the tenant nor the DHCR were parties to an "assurance of discontinuance" upon which the order was based.
Finally, DHCR Policy Statement 91-05, by its own terms, does not limit the time within which the DHCR may, sua sponte, reopen a matter. Copertino, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.