What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 3 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: Failure to Maintain; Site Safety / Safeguarding; Other Building / Code Compliance. The hearing date is October 8, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 3, 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.
Failure to Maintain — Summons 39198835H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 8, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI APPROX. 9AM, OBSERVED FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE HOUSEKEEPING THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION SITE: 1ST -3RD FLOOR. OBSERVED PILES OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRI BAGS, PILE OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRI, STACKS 2X4S, DEMOED MATE
Cited provision(s): 181 — BC 3303.4 & 27-1018 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE HOUSEKEEPING PER SECTION REQUIREMENTS
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39198836J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 8, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI APPROX. 9:05AM OBSERVED FAILURE TO SAFEGUARD PROPERLY. EXPOSED FLOORING AT MEZZANINE LEVEL TO LOWER FLOOR, WHERE WORKERS WERE OBSERVED ACTIVELY PERFORMING TASKS UNDERNEATH EXPOSED OPENING AREA. UNDER JOB#
Cited provision(s): 109 — BC 3301.2,27-1009(A) FAIL TO SAFEGUARD PERS/PROPERTY AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION OP
How this type of condition is typically resolved
These charges focus on protection of workers, occupants, neighboring property or the public during construction. Correction normally requires fixing the specific unsafe condition, documenting required safety measures and keeping the required site records current.
Hearing issues to verify
- What precise safety measure does the summons say was missing or inadequate?
- Was the condition temporary and corrected before or during the inspection?
- Did an approved site-safety plan or required site document address the cited condition?
Evidence that may matter
- Site Safety Plan / logistics drawings
- Daily safety logs and competent-person/site-safety records
- Photographs taken around the inspection time
- Contractor or safety-manager statements and correction records
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39198834X
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 8, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI OBSERVED CONSTRUCTION WORK BEING PERFORMED( 1ST THROUGH 3RD FL) AT APPROX. 9:30AM FAILURE TO POST TPP NOTICES THROUGHOUT THE OCCUPIED FLOORS 4 THROUGH 6 IN BUILDING. WHILE WORK IS BEING DONE ON THE BELOW F
Cited provision(s): 2L5
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
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 3 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