What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 5 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 2 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; 2 Failure to Maintain summonses; Egress / Exit Obstruction. The hearing date is October 22, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 18, 2026.
Important: The discussion below identifies correction paths, hearing issues and evidence worth investigating from the summons data. It does not state that a defense will succeed. OATH decides liability from the evidence and law presented in the case.
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 35729458X
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: PERMANENT DWELLING USED/CONVERTED FOR OTHER THAN PERMANENT-RESIDENTIALPURPOSES. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS RECORDS INDICATES PREMISES TO BE LEGALLY APPROVED AS A CLASS "A" MULTIPLE DWELLING. NOW APARTMENT #4 ON 2N
Cited provision(s): 1E5 — AC 28-210.3 PERM.DWELLING OFFERED/USED/CONV TO OTHER THAN PERM.RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE; 1E6 — 28-202.1 ADDITIONAL DAILY PENALTY FOR CLASS 1 VIOLATION OF 28-210.3
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Egress / Exit Obstruction — Summons 35729459H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. LACK OF REQUIRED NUMBER OF MEANS OF EGRESS FOR EVERY FLOOR PER BC 1018.1(2008 CODE); 27-366; BC 1021.1(2014 CODE); BC 1006.3(2022 CODE), FOR TRANSIENT USE
Cited provision(s): 189 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN A CODE COMPLIANT MANNER. FAILURE TO PR
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Egress charges are generally corrected by removing the obstruction or restoring the required exit width/path and then documenting that the means of egress is clear and code compliant.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the cited passageway actually required egress for the affected occupancy?
- Did the alleged obstruction exist when the inspector observed it?
- Was the condition immediately removed and can the timing be documented?
Evidence that may matter
- Dated photographs showing the exit path
- Approved floor/egress plans
- Building or security logs
- Statements or work records documenting removal of stored items/obstructions
Failure to Maintain — Summons 35729460P
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN A CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A SYSTEM OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS WHERE IS REQUIRED AS PER BC 903.2 AND 27-954 FOR TRANSIENT USE AT APARTMENT #4 ON 2ND FLOOR.-PREVIOUS
Cited provision(s): 102 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BLDG IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Failure-to-maintain charges are fact-specific. The owner should identify the exact building component or service equipment cited, repair the condition, and document the repair with evidence tied to the inspection location/date.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the description accurately identify the component, location and condition?
- Was the condition already repaired or not present when the summons was issued?
- Was another party responsible for maintenance under facts that are legally relevant to the respondent's liability?
Evidence that may matter
- Dated before/after photographs
- Repair invoices and contractor statements
- Professional inspection/report when structural or technical conditions are involved
- Maintenance logs and prior inspection records
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 35729461R
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: BC 907.2.8. FAILURE TO PROVIDE CLASS "J" FIRE ALARM SYSTEM FOR TRANSIENT USE AT APARTMENT #4 ON 2ND FLOOR.-PREVIOUS ECB VIOLATION #35725672Z, 35725910P. REMEDY: DISCONTINUE ILLEGAL OCCUPANCY.
Cited provision(s): 106 — 27-/28-/BC-MISC MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The first step is to read the inspector's narrative together with every cited code section and determine exactly what act, condition or missing filing DOB alleges. The correction and hearing strategy should then be built around that specific charge rather than a generic violation-removal checklist.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct property, respondent, date and observed condition?
- Do agency records support or contradict the inspector's description?
- Was the condition corrected, permitted or otherwise resolved before the hearing?
Evidence that may matter
- Official DOB/OATH property and summons records
- Dated photographs and videos
- Permits, approved plans and inspection results
- Contracts, receipts, professional letters or witness statements tied to the cited condition
Failure to Maintain — Summons 35729462Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. AT TIME OF INSPECTION AT 103 EAST 2ND STREET SIDE 5TH AND 4TH FLOOR FIRE ESCAPE WINDOWS ARE BEING OBSTRUCTED BY AC UNITS IMPEDING A SAFE DISCHARGE IN CASE
Cited provision(s): 102 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BLDG IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Failure-to-maintain charges are fact-specific. The owner should identify the exact building component or service equipment cited, repair the condition, and document the repair with evidence tied to the inspection location/date.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the description accurately identify the component, location and condition?
- Was the condition already repaired or not present when the summons was issued?
- Was another party responsible for maintenance under facts that are legally relevant to the respondent's liability?
Evidence that may matter
- Dated before/after photographs
- Repair invoices and contractor statements
- Professional inspection/report when structural or technical conditions are involved
- Maintenance logs and prior inspection records
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 5 October summons records against the current OATH/DOB record, identify which alleged conditions remain open, and separate the hearing defense from the DOB correction / certification work. That prevents paying for correction work that does not address the actual charge—or appearing at OATH without the documents needed for the cited condition.
Submit These Summonses for Review