What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 6 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 3 Site Safety / Safeguarding summonses; Elevator / Vertical Transportation; Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold; Other Building / Code Compliance. The hearing date is October 29, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 24, 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.
Elevator / Vertical Transportation — Summons 39558303N
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, WHILE RESPONDING TO AN INCIDENT IN WHICH A MASONRY BLOCK STRUCK A WORKER IN THE ELEVATOR SHAFT, OBSERVED THAT THE PLANKS ON WHICH THE WORKER HAD BEEN STANDING WERE REMOVED AFTER THE INCID
Cited provision(s): 1P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Elevator charges often require licensed-elevator maintenance or repair, the required periodic inspection/test filing, an affirmation of correction where applicable, and reinspection for hazardous conditions.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the device number/location on the summons match the building's elevator record?
- Was the cited defect repaired or the device removed from service before the inspection?
- Were the required CAT/periodic inspection filings timely and accepted?
Evidence that may matter
- Elevator device record and inspection/test reports
- Maintenance contractor logs and repair tickets
- Affirmation of Correction / reinspection result
- Photographs or controller/service records
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39558298H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, WHILE RESPONDING TO AN INCIDENT IN WHICH A MASONRY BLOCK STRUCK A WORKER IN THE ELEVATOR SHAFT, REVIEW OF THE PRE-TASK DOCUMENTATION SHOWED CHOPPING OPERATIONS WERE PLANNED ON THE ROOF/BU
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39558301J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED A SUPPORTED SCAFFOLD IN USE BY MULTIPLE WORKERS NOT MAINTAINED, MISSING VERTICAL JOINING PINS, UNSECURED PLATFORM PLANKS, AND PLANKS STACKED ON OTHER PLANKS RATHER THAN SUPPORTED
Cited provision(s): 1P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The issue is typically whether the shed/scaffold was permitted, properly installed and maintained, and whether the equipment matched the approved filing and current safety requirements. Correction can involve permit renewal, physical modification, inspection, or removal.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the equipment covered by an active permit on the inspection date?
- Did the installed dimensions/protection match the approved design?
- Was a cited defect already corrected before the summons was issued or served?
Evidence that may matter
- DOB NOW equipment permit and approved drawings
- Engineer/contractor inspection logs
- Dated site photographs
- Renewal or removal records
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39558299J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, WHILE RESPONDING TO AN INCIDENT IN WHICH A MASONRY BLOCK STRUCK A WORKER, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PERMIT HOLDER FAILED TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INCIDENT. THE INCIDEN
Cited provision(s): 192 — BC 3301.8 FAILURE TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF AN ACCIDENT AT CONSTRU
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39558302L
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT RECORDS DETERMINED THAT THE PRIMARY SITE SAFETY MANAGER DESIGNATED UNDER PERMIT M01297566-I1-FD ALSO SERVED AS SITE SAFETY MANAGER UNDER PERMIT M01297786-I1-FD, CONTR
Cited provision(s): 1P7
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39558306Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 24, 2026; hearing October 29, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, REVIEW OF DEPARTMENT RECORDS DETERMINED THAT THE SITE SAFETY MANAGER FAILED TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INCIDENT IN WHICH A MASONRY BLOCK STRUCK A WORKER. THE INCIDENT OCC
Cited provision(s): 193 — BC 3310.8.2 SITE SAFETY MANAGER/COORDINATOR FAILED TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE DEPAR
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
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 6 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