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: 2 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; Failure to Maintain. The hearing date is October 15, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 7, 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 35729229M
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 7, 2026; hearing October 15, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: PERMANENT DWELLING USED/CONVERTED FOR OTHER THAN PERMANENT RESIDENTIALPURPOSES. NOTED: DOB RECORDS INDICATES PREMISES TO BE LEGALLY APPROVEDAS A CLASS "A" MULTIPLE DWELLING. NOW 1ST FLOOR APARTMENT IS BEING USE
Cited provision(s): 2F3 — BC 28-210.3 PERM.DWELLING OFFERED/USED/CONV TO OTHER THAN PERM.RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE
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 35729230J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 7, 2026; hearing October 15, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO FAILURE TO BUILDING IN A CODE-COMPLIANT IN A CODE-COMPLIANTMANNER. LACK OF A SYSTEM OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS WHERE REQUIRED PER BC903.2 AND 27-954 FOR TRANSIENT USE AT 1ST FLOOR APARTMENT. REMEDY: DIS
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 35729231L
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 7, 2026; hearing October 15, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: BC 907.2.8. FAILURE TO PROVIDE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM(CLASS J) FOR TRANSIENT USE AT 1ST FLOOR APARTMENT. 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
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