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: 3 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; 2 Work Without a Permit summonses. 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.
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39558090Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: 3314.15.2 OBS. SUSPENDED SCAFFOLDS IN USE/READILY AVAILABLE FOR USE WITH STIRRUP/HOIST ASSEMBLIES IMPROPERLY FITTED AND POSITIONED. REQ'D 6-18-IN. END PLACEMENT WAS NOT MAINTAINED. ON 40-FT MODULAR PLATFORM, ST
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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39558088J
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBS. SUSPENDED SCAFFOLDS IN USE/READILY AVAILABLE FOR USE AT EXPS. 3 & 4, INCL. ROOF/SETBACK LOCATIONS. MULTIPLE TIEBACK ANCHOR PLATES INSTALLED AT ROOF/SETBACKS DIFFERED FROM AND WERE NOT SHOWN ON APPROVED CD-
Cited provision(s): 282 — 28-105.12.2 WRK DOESN'T CONFORM TO APPROV DOCS AND/OR APPROV AMENDMENTS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The correction path usually starts by determining whether the observed work required a permit and whether the condition can legally remain. If it can remain, legalization may require plans, a filing, permit, inspections and closeout; if it cannot or the owner does not want to legalize it, restoration to a lawful condition may be required.
Hearing issues to verify
- Did a valid permit already cover the exact work described by the inspector on the issue date?
- Was the cited activity actually permit-required work, or was it maintenance / exempt work under the applicable facts?
- Do the approved drawings, permit scope and inspection history match the condition the inspector described?
- If a Stop Work Order was issued, was the work stopped and was any later work performed only after the required authorization?
Evidence that may matter
- Permit and DOB NOW/BIS job records that predate the inspection
- Approved plans and amendments showing the cited work
- Dated photographs of the condition and construction stage
- Contracts, invoices and contractor statements establishing what work was actually performed
- Inspection / sign-off records if the work was subsequently legalized
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39558091K
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBS. SUPPORTED SCAFFOLD AT EXPS. 1 & 4 CONTRARY TO APPROVED PLANS. EXP. 1 TRUSSES MEASURED 18 FT VS. 16 FT REQ'D; MASONRY FRAMES USED INSTEAD OF WALK-THROUGH FRAMES, WITH 4-FT OUTRIGGERS. AT EXP. 4, W8X13 BEAM
Cited provision(s): 282 — 28-105.12.2 WRK DOESN'T CONFORM TO APPROV DOCS AND/OR APPROV AMENDMENTS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The correction path usually starts by determining whether the observed work required a permit and whether the condition can legally remain. If it can remain, legalization may require plans, a filing, permit, inspections and closeout; if it cannot or the owner does not want to legalize it, restoration to a lawful condition may be required.
Hearing issues to verify
- Did a valid permit already cover the exact work described by the inspector on the issue date?
- Was the cited activity actually permit-required work, or was it maintenance / exempt work under the applicable facts?
- Do the approved drawings, permit scope and inspection history match the condition the inspector described?
- If a Stop Work Order was issued, was the work stopped and was any later work performed only after the required authorization?
Evidence that may matter
- Permit and DOB NOW/BIS job records that predate the inspection
- Approved plans and amendments showing the cited work
- Dated photographs of the condition and construction stage
- Contracts, invoices and contractor statements establishing what work was actually performed
- Inspection / sign-off records if the work was subsequently legalized
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39558089L
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBS. WORK IN PROGRESS AT 13-STORY NEW BLDG. REQ'D BC CH. 33 SUSPENDED-SCAFFOLD RECORDS WERE NOT MAINTAINED ON SITE OR MADE READILY AVAILABLE. UPON REQUEST, COMPETENT PERSON FAILED TO PROVIDE PLATFORM MFR. SPECS
Cited provision(s): 1F2 — BC 3301.7 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO MAINTAIN/DISPLAY ON SITE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY BC CHAPTER 3
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39558092M
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 18, 2026; hearing October 22, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: 3314.3.4 OBS. SUPPORTED SCAFFOLD AND PLATFORMS INSTALLED AT EXPS. 1 & 4 WITHOUT REQ'D SEALED PE LOAD-IMPOSED LETTER. UPON REQUEST, COMPETENT PERSON FAILED TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION VERIFYING THE SUPPORTING STRUC
Cited provision(s): 2P7
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
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