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: Failure to Maintain; Façade / Exterior Wall; Egress / Exit Obstruction. The hearing dates are October 14, 2026, October 21, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 3, 2026, August 6, 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.
Failure to Maintain — Summons 39198878H
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 3, 2026; hearing October 14, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BUILDINGS IN CODE COMPLIANT MANNER: ATOI AT EXP # 3 REAR APPOX 8' CHAIN LINKS FENCES WITH BARB WIRES VIOLATED FIRE CODE FOR NYFD ACCESS., REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE; REMOVED BARB WIRES
Cited provision(s): 202 — 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
Façade / Exterior Wall — Summons 39199640M
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 6, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI, OBSERVED A MULTI-DWELLING BUILDING WITH AN APPROXIMATELY 8-FOOT-HIGH CHAIN-LINK FENCE ERECTED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. BRAIDED WIRE WAS ATTACHED TO THE TOP OF THE FENCE, INCREASING THE OVERALL HEIGHT
Cited provision(s): 104 — 28-302.1 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN BLDG WALL(S) OR APPURTENANCES
How this type of condition is typically resolved
Exterior-wall charges usually require a competent inspection of the cited façade/appurtenance, repair of unsafe or deteriorated conditions, and—when the building is subject to FISP—the appropriate QEWI report or amended filing.
Hearing issues to verify
- Does the inspector's description match the actual exposure, floor and defect?
- Was the condition already repaired or protected before the summons date?
- Was there a current FISP/QEWI filing addressing the same condition?
Evidence that may matter
- QEWI report, FISP filing or amended report
- Close-up and elevation photographs identifying the exact defect
- Repair proposals, invoices and completion records
- Engineer/architect letter and inspection documentation
Egress / Exit Obstruction — Summons 39199639P
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 6, 2026; hearing October 21, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI, OBSERVED A 4-STORY MIXED-USE BUILDING WITH WALK-UP APARTMENTS. AT EXPOSURE #3 (RIGHT SIDE), A CHAIN-LINK FENCE APPROX. WITH A LOCKED GATE INSTALLED ACROSS THE REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS FROM THE REAR YARD,
Cited provision(s): 127 — 27-369,BC 1020.2 FAIL TO PROVIDE UNOBSTRUCTED EXIT PASSAGEWAY
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
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