What DOB is alleging at this property
This October hearing page is not just a schedule entry. The supplied DOB extract contains 9 summons records for this property identifier. The charge mix is: 3 Other Building / Code Compliance summonses; 2 Work Without a Permit summonses; 2 Site Safety / Safeguarding summonses; Failure to Maintain; Stop Work Order. The hearing dates are October 14, 2026, October 21, 2026, October 7, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 12, 2026, August 3, 2026, July 20, 2026, July 24, 2026, June 12, 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 39556875J
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 20, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: OBSERVED JERSEY BARRIERS AT EXP#1 NOT AS PER MANUFACTURES SPECIFICATION. JERSEY BARRIERS NOT INTERLOCKED FILL WITH WATER/SAND WHICH POSES A POTENTIAL HAZARD BY ALLOWING UNINTENDED MOVEMENT OF THE BARRIERS INCR
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
Failure to Maintain — Summons 39557048K
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 24, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 8 STORY NEW BUILDING TOP OFF, I OBSERVED ALL TRADES IN OPERATION AND LARGE AMOUNT OF GARBAGE AND CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS ON ALL FLOORS BLOCKING THE WALK WAY THROUGH OUT THE JOBSITE
Cited provision(s): 181 — BC 3303.4 & 27-1018 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE HOUSEKEEPING PER SECTION REQUIREMENTS
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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39557421J
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION, SUPPORTED SCAFFOLD WAS BEING ERECTED IN THE INNER YARD WITH A 2-FT TO 5-FT CONVERSION NOT DETAILED ON THE APPROVED DRAWINGS. APPROVED DRAWINGS ALSO DID NOT PERMIT STORAGE OF I-BEAMS ON TH
Cited provision(s): 182 — 28-105.12.2 WORK DOES NOT CONFORM TO APPROVED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND/OR APPROV
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 39557049M
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 24, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION, I OBSERVED WORKER ON A EXTENSION LADDER DOING STUCCO WORK AT EXPOSURE #2, UPON REVIEW OF THE SITE SAFETY PLAN AND THE SCAFFOLD DRAWINGS THEY REVEAL THAT A SUPPORTED PIPE SCAFFOLD S
Cited provision(s): 182 — 28-105.12.2 WORK DOES NOT CONFORM TO APPROVED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND/OR APPROV
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
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39556874H
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 20, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: WEATHER ADVISORY BC 3307.4. 7 ATOI OBSERVED INADEQUATE WORK AND STORAGE ZONE. MATERIAL STORED AT ZONE EXCEEDS HEIGHT. NO FENCING ON BARRIERS, NOT FULLY ENCLOSING WORK ZONE ALSO ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY AND
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
Stop Work Order — Summons 39557046R
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 24, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION, I OBSERVED AT EXPOSURE #1 WORK AND STORAGE ZONE IS BEING USED, 2 TRUCKS WERE PARKED IN THE ZONE FOR DELIVERY AND DEBRIS REMOVAL. A STOP WORK ORDER IS IN EFFECT TO STOP ALL USED OF
Cited provision(s): 112 — 28-207.2.2 UNLAWFULLY CONTINUED WORK WHILE NOTICE OF A STOP WORK ORDER
How this type of condition is typically resolved
An active Stop Work Order has to be treated separately from the underlying summons. The cited unsafe or unpermitted condition must be corrected or legalized, required permits/penalties addressed, and the issuing agency must formally rescind or modify the order before prohibited work resumes.
Hearing issues to verify
- What exact work was covered by the Stop Work Order: all work or only part of the project?
- Was the activity observed after the order actually prohibited work, or was it authorized safety / emergency / corrective work?
- Was the Stop Work Order already rescinded or modified before the activity alleged in the summons?
Evidence that may matter
- Copy of the Stop Work Order and any rescission/modification notice
- DOB permit records and inspector correspondence
- Daily logs, photographs and contractor records showing when work stopped or resumed
- Evidence identifying any limited corrective/safety work performed
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39555414M
CLASS - 1 · Issued June 12, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ACTIVE PROPOSED 8STORY MAJOR BUILDING CURRENTLY ON 5FLR DECK. UPON REQUEST NO SITE SAFETY MANAGER WAS ON SITE DURING INSPECTION & TIME AFTER. NOTED ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION OPS ON EVERY FLOOR. STRIPPING OPS ON 3RD F
Cited provision(s): 119 — BC 3310.5,27-1009(D) FAIL TO HAVE SITE SAFETY MGR/COORDINATOR PRESENT AS REQUIRED
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
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 39557860L
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 12, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: 15RCNY 20-04 8-STORY NEW BUILDING AND ACTIVE JOB SITE, A FIRE HYDRANT WAS OBSERVED IN USE WITHOUT BACKFLOW PREVENTION. THIS CONDITION POSES A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DUE TO POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION. ST
Cited provision(s): 179 — AC 1RCNY-MISC,RS-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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39557859Y
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 12, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT INSPECTION OF A 8-STORY NEW BUILDING, AN ACTIVE JOB SITE, STUCCO AND STYROFOAM OPERATIONS WERE OBSERVED. STYROFOAM RESIDUE WAS OBSERVED ON THE STREET, VEHICLES, AND ADJACENT PROPERTY, INCLUDING WINDOWS AND F
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
Case-specific next step
For this property, the first paid review should reconcile the 9 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