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 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; Work Without a Permit. The hearing date is October 16, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 4, 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 39557505R
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 4, 2026; hearing October 16, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED FIXED OUTRIGGERS SUSPENDED SCAFFOLD INSTALLED ON ROOF OF 26 STORY NB. UPON REVIEW OF DOB SYSTEMS NO NOTIFICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT WAS PROVIDED PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF FIXED OUTRIGGER SUSPENDED SC
Cited provision(s): 261 — BC 3314.1.1 & 27-1050.1 FAILED TO NOTIFY DEPARTMENT/OBTAIN PERMIT PRIOR TO USE/INST. OFF C-HOO
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 39557506Z
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 4, 2026; hearing October 16, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED FIXED OUTRIGGER MULTI-POINT SUSPENDED SCAFFOLD INSTALLED ON ROOF @ EXPO 1 & 3. UPON REQUEST FOR DOB APPROVED PLANS FOR THE MULTI-POINT SCAFFOLD INSTALLED, NONE WAS PROVIDED AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION. S
Cited provision(s): 2F7 — 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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39557507K
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 4, 2026; hearing October 16, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED TWO POINT SUSPENDED SCAFFOLD INSTALLED ON ROOF @ ALL EXPOS. UPON REVIEW OF DOB APPROVED PLANS PROVIDED, NO DETAILS FOR DIFFERENT FRAMES TO BE INSTALLED & USED FOR ONE PLATFORM. ADDITIONALLY, FRAME OUTR
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
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