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: 4 Demolition summonses; 2 Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold summonses; 2 Site Safety / Safeguarding summonses; Work Without a Permit. The hearing date is October 7, 2026; the source issue date(s) are July 30, 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.
Demolition — Summons 39557310R
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE, LARGE AMOUNT OF DEMOLITION DEBRIS WITH SHEETROCK, WOOD PLANKS, INSTALLATION AND PAPERS WERE ALL PILE UP. FAILURE TO REMOVE
Cited provision(s): 1P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Demolition charges can involve missing permits, missing notifications, unsafe demolition practices or work outside approved scope. Resolution requires identifying the exact procedural/safety failure and completing the missing filing or corrective work.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was a demolition permit or required notification in effect before work began?
- Did the cited activity constitute demolition under the applicable filing, or another permitted scope?
- Do contractor and agency records show the required notice was timely?
Evidence that may matter
- Demolition permit and DOB NOW filing history
- Required notification confirmation / timestamp
- Asbestos/environmental documents
- Contractor logs, photographs and demolition sequence records
Demolition — Summons 39557313M
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS, FIRE HYDRANT AT EXPOSURE #2 WITH HOSE CONNECTED TO JOBSITE, UPON REQUEST FOR DEP PERMIT TO USED FIRE HYDRANT
Cited provision(s): 106 — 27-/28-/BC-MISC MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Demolition charges can involve missing permits, missing notifications, unsafe demolition practices or work outside approved scope. Resolution requires identifying the exact procedural/safety failure and completing the missing filing or corrective work.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was a demolition permit or required notification in effect before work began?
- Did the cited activity constitute demolition under the applicable filing, or another permitted scope?
- Do contractor and agency records show the required notice was timely?
Evidence that may matter
- Demolition permit and DOB NOW filing history
- Required notification confirmation / timestamp
- Asbestos/environmental documents
- Contractor logs, photographs and demolition sequence records
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557339K
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS ON SITE, 2 WORKERS ON SUPPORTED PIPE SCAFFOLD WITH NO GUARDRAILS, NO SCREW JACKS NO BASEPLATES AND THEY WERE
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
Sidewalk Shed / Scaffold — Summons 39557311Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, FULL DEMOLITION, I OBSERVED SIDEWALK SHED AND CONSTRUCTION FENCE INSTALLED AT EXPOSURE #1 AND 2, UPON REQUEST FOR DOT PERMIT TO OCCUPY AND CROSS SIDEWALK NONE
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
Demolition — Summons 39557314Y
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS ON SITE. OXYGEN AND ACETYLENE TANKS WITH HOSE WAS NOT SECURED, UPON REQUEST FOR FDNY PERMIT NONE WAS PRESENTE
Cited provision(s): 1P7
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Demolition charges can involve missing permits, missing notifications, unsafe demolition practices or work outside approved scope. Resolution requires identifying the exact procedural/safety failure and completing the missing filing or corrective work.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was a demolition permit or required notification in effect before work began?
- Did the cited activity constitute demolition under the applicable filing, or another permitted scope?
- Do contractor and agency records show the required notice was timely?
Evidence that may matter
- Demolition permit and DOB NOW filing history
- Required notification confirmation / timestamp
- Asbestos/environmental documents
- Contractor logs, photographs and demolition sequence records
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39557337R
CLASS - 2 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS ON SITE AND AT EXPOSURE #3 A FREE STANDING WALL WAS LEFT IN PLACE IN DANGER OF COLLAPSING. FAILURE TO REMOVED
Cited provision(s): 209 — 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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39557290Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING FOR FULL DEMOLITION AND 1ST FLOOR PARTIALLY DEMO, I OBSERVED LARGE EXCAVATOR ON FOOT PRINT OF BUILDING ON TOP OF BASEMENT/CELLAR, UPON REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT
Cited provision(s): 101 — 28-105.1 WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT
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
Site Safety / Safeguarding — Summons 39557312K
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS ON SITE. UPON REQUEST FOR SITE SAFETY ORIENTATION AND REFRESHER NONE WAS PRESENTED OR AT JOBSITE. FAILURE TO
Cited provision(s): 1J4 — BC 3301.11.1 AND 2 PERMIT HOLDER FAILED TO ENSURE WORKERS RECEIVE SITE SAFETY ORIENTATION
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
Demolition — Summons 39557338Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued July 30, 2026; hearing October 7, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT THE TIME OF MY INSPECTION OF A 2 STORY BUILDING, I OBSERVED ACTIVE DEMOLITION SITE WITH 6 WORKERS ON SITE AND LARGE EXCAVATOR IN USED, UPON REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION TO OPERATE IT WAS EXPIRED. FAILURE TO PRO
Cited provision(s): 1F1 — BC 3301.1.3 (2014 CODE) FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Demolition charges can involve missing permits, missing notifications, unsafe demolition practices or work outside approved scope. Resolution requires identifying the exact procedural/safety failure and completing the missing filing or corrective work.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was a demolition permit or required notification in effect before work began?
- Did the cited activity constitute demolition under the applicable filing, or another permitted scope?
- Do contractor and agency records show the required notice was timely?
Evidence that may matter
- Demolition permit and DOB NOW filing history
- Required notification confirmation / timestamp
- Asbestos/environmental documents
- Contractor logs, photographs and demolition sequence 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