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: 2 Failure to Maintain summonses; Vacate Order; Other Building / Code Compliance; Egress / Exit Obstruction. The hearing date is October 21, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 13, 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.
Vacate Order — Summons 35729197R
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 13, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO OBEY A VACATE ORDER FROM THE COMMISSIONER. NOTED: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION, CELLAR LEVEL OF APT #1R DUPLEX HAS BEEN REOCCUPIED DESPITE ACTIVE VACATE ORDER #B456/2025 ISSUED ON 10/07/2025, DUPLEX APT
Cited provision(s): 1F9 — 28-207.4 FAILURE TO OBEY A VACATE ORDER
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Vacate-order matters require confirming the exact areas and occupants covered by the order, correcting the conditions that caused the order, completing any required permits/inspections, and obtaining formal agency authorization before reoccupancy.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the summons identify the correct premises/area and the same vacate order reflected in agency records?
- Was the area occupied on the cited date, and by whom?
- Had the agency already rescinded or modified the vacate order before the alleged occupancy?
Evidence that may matter
- Vacate Order and rescission/modification documents
- DOB/HPD records showing status and affected areas
- Photographs, access logs, leases or occupancy records
- Professional reports / inspection results documenting correction
Other Building / Code Compliance — Summons 35729198Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 13, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: PERMANENT DWELLING USED/CONVERTED FOR OTHER THAN PERMANENT-RESIDENTIALPURPOSES. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS RECORDS INDICATES PREMISES TO BE LEGALLY APPROVED AS A CLASS "A" MULTIPLE DWELLING NOE: UNIT #1R DUPLEX AP
Cited provision(s): 1E5 — AC 28-210.3 PERM.DWELLING OFFERED/USED/CONV TO OTHER THAN PERM.RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE; 1E6 — 28-202.1 ADDITIONAL DAILY PENALTY FOR CLASS 1 VIOLATION OF 28-210.3
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
Egress / Exit Obstruction — Summons 35729199K
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 13, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. LACK OF REQUIRED NUMBER OF MEANS OF EGRESS FOR EVERY FLOOR PER BC 1018.1(2008 CODE); 27-466; BC 1021.1(2014 CODE); BC 1006.3(2022 CODE) FOR TRANSIENT USE A
Cited provision(s): 189 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN A CODE COMPLIANT MANNER. FAILURE TO PR
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Egress charges are generally corrected by removing the obstruction or restoring the required exit width/path and then documenting that the means of egress is clear and code compliant.
Hearing issues to verify
- Was the cited passageway actually required egress for the affected occupancy?
- Did the alleged obstruction exist when the inspector observed it?
- Was the condition immediately removed and can the timing be documented?
Evidence that may matter
- Dated photographs showing the exit path
- Approved floor/egress plans
- Building or security logs
- Statements or work records documenting removal of stored items/obstructions
Failure to Maintain — Summons 35729550Z
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 13, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. LACK OR REQUIRED SYSTEM OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS WHERE REQUIRED AS PER 903.2 AND 27-954 FOR TRANSIENT USE AT DUPLEX APT #1R AT THE 1ST FLOOR. PRE ECB #35719
Cited provision(s): 102 — 28-301.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BLDG IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER
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
Failure to Maintain — Summons 35729551K
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 13, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: BC 907.2.8. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDING IN CODE-COMPLIANT MANNER. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A CLASS "J" FIRE ALARM SYSTEM FOR TRANSIENT USE AT DUPLEX APT #1R AT THE 1ST FLOOR. PRE ECBS #35719428X, 35727752H. REMEDY:
Cited provision(s): 106 — 27-/28-/BC-MISC MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS
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
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