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: 4 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; 2 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses. The hearing dates are October 16, 2026, October 2, 2026, October 30, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 1, 2026, August 16, 2026, July 28, 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 39557174L
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 28, 2026; hearing October 2, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION OF A 12-STORY NB TOPPED OFF, ACTIVE SITE I OBSERVED AT EXP #1 THAT PLASTIC JERSEY BARRIERS WERE NOT MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH BC 3301.1.3. THE BARRIERS WERE NOT PROPERLY FILLED WIT
Cited provision(s): 2F6 — BC 3301.1.3 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS
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
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557391H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 1, 2026; hearing October 16, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED 12-STORY BUILDING. YODOCKS AT EXPOSURE 1 WERE NOT MAINTAINED PER MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS. YODOCKS WERE DISCONNECTED/UNSECURED, CREATING OPENINGS IN THE STORAGE ZONE. MATERIAL
Cited provision(s): 1F1 — BC 3301.1.3 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS
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
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557386N
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 1, 2026; hearing October 16, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED 12-STORY BUILDING. STORAGE ZONE AT EXPOSURE 1 WAS NOT MAINTAINED. REQUIRED 4-FOOT BARRIERS WERE NOT PROVIDED TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS FROM STORED MATERIALS. PALLETS OF TILE, USED B
Cited provision(s): 1P7
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
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557973H
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 16, 2026; hearing October 30, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED PROPOSED 12-STORY BUILDING TOPPED OFF. YODOCKS AT EXPOSURE 1 WERE NOT MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS. BARRIER SECTIONS WERE DISPLACED AND NOT PROPERLY
Cited provision(s): 1F1 — BC 3301.1.3 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557974J
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 16, 2026; hearing October 30, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED PROPOSED 12-STORY BUILDING TOPPED OFF. AT EXPOSURE 1, SIDEWALK WAS UNEVEN AND UNREPAIRED, WITH YODOCKS ALSO OBSTRUCTING THE AVAILABLE PASSAGEWAY. CONDITION CREATES A TRIPPING HAZ
Cited provision(s): 223 — BC 3307.6,27-1021 SIDEWALK SHED DOES NOT MEET CODE SPECIFICATIONS
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 39557975L
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 16, 2026; hearing October 30, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, OBSERVED PROPOSED 12-STORY BUILDING TOPPED OFF. PARTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE REMAINED AT EXPOSURE 1 WITH EXPOSED NAILS AND SCREWS PROTRUDING FROM THE FENCE. FENCE WAS ALSO NOT PAINTED
Cited provision(s): 211 — BC 3307.7,27-1021(C) JOB SITE FENCE NOT CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION
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 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