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 Work Without a Permit summonses; 2 Failure to Maintain summonses; Illegal Occupancy / Conversion. The hearing date is October 27, 2026; the source issue date(s) are August 22, 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.
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39201447K
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 22, 2026; hearing October 27, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION OBSERVED PLUMBING WORK DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT. PRESSURIZED REFRIGERANT LINES RUN TROUGH WALLS CONNECTING A/C SPLIT UNIT TO A CONDENSER UNIT AT EXP3. AND DRINE LINES RUN TROUGH WALL TO BATHR
Cited provision(s): 201 — 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
Illegal Occupancy / Conversion — Summons 39201450L
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 22, 2026; hearing October 27, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: ATOI OBSERVED OCCUPANCY CONTRARY TO COFO. ON RECORD IS A OFFICE SPACE AT 3RD FLOOR. UPON INSPECTION OBSERVED SPACE BEING USED AS A ILLEGAL ADULT ESTABLISHMENT. WITH 10 BEDS LAY OUT THROUGHOUT 3RD FLOOR UNIT., D
Cited provision(s): 103 — 28-118.3.2 OCC CONTRARY TO THAT ALLOWED BY THE C OF O OR DOB RECORDS
How this type of condition is typically resolved
The key question is whether the observed occupancy or layout matches the lawful use of the premises. Resolution may require restoring the prior lawful layout/use or, when legally feasible, filing plans and obtaining approvals to legalize the condition.
Hearing issues to verify
- What use and number of dwelling/occupancy units are shown by the Certificate of Occupancy, Schedule of Occupancy or other lawful-use records?
- Did the inspector accurately identify how the space was being used on the cited date?
- Was the cited space actually occupied as alleged, or were the observed beds, kitchens, locks or partitions consistent with another lawful use?
- Is there an approved filing or historical record supporting the present use?
Evidence that may matter
- Certificate of Occupancy / Schedule of Occupancy and approved plans
- Historic occupancy records, permits and prior approved layouts
- Dated photographs and floor plans
- Leases, tenant records or sworn statements concerning actual use
- Permits/inspection records if the condition was legalized or restored
Failure to Maintain — Summons 39201448M
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 22, 2026; hearing October 27, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN, OBSERVED COMPROMISED FIRE RATING TROUGHT 3RD FLOOR UNIT. MULTIPLE HOLES IN CEILING AND WALLS WHICH COMPROMISING THE FIRE RATING OF THE UNIT IN CASE OF EMERGENCY., REPAIR AND/REPLACE
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
Work Without a Permit — Summons 39201446Z
CLASS - 2 · Issued August 22, 2026; hearing October 27, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: AT TIME OF INSPECTION OBSERVED ELECTRICAL WORK DON'T WITHOUT A PERMIT, OBSERVED ELECTRICAL WIRE RAN THROUGHOUT 3RD FLOOR UNIT, HANGING FROM CEILING AND WALLS. ELECTRICAL CONNECTION FOR SPLIT A/C UNIT ALL DONE W
Cited provision(s): 2C4 — 27-3018(B) ELECTRICAL 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
Failure to Maintain — Summons 39201449Y
CLASS - 1 · Issued August 22, 2026; hearing October 27, 2026. · Hearing status: PENDING
DOB allegation in the source extract: FAILURE TO MAINTAIN ACTIVE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, OBSERVED A NUMBER OF SPRINKLER HEADS PAINTED OVER AND COVERED WITH TAPE AND PAPER, OBSTRUCTING THE DISCHARGE AND SAFE ACTIVATION IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE., REPAIR AND/
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
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