Electrical installation and permit: NYC DOB 27-3018(B) / OATH summons 39181986Y

Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export

ATOI AT A 2-STORY RESIDENTIAL HOME, I OBSERVED AT EXTERIOR AREA ELECTRICAL WWP, (1) NEW ROUGH WIRING, WITH RECEPTACLES OUTLETS MOUNTED ON CMU WALL AT EXPOSURE #1 AND 4. (2)NEW BX CABLE ROUGH WIRING CONNECTED TO

Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 39181986Y; BIN 4155878; export issue date 03/26/2026. The earlier export status was ACTIVE; obtain current status from DOB or OATH. The CSV contains a respondent mailing address, which is not presumed to identify the inspected property. This is the entire description available in the supplied export, not a certified full summons, inspector notes or evidentiary exhibits. The description is at the export’s approximately 210-character field limit and may terminate mid-word or mid-sentence.

Get the complete, authentic notice: search summons 39181986Y in OATH Summons Finder instructions (download actual summons) and download the actual summons; review DOB records in NYC DOB records search. Never substitute the editorial discussion below for the inspector’s words.

Charge classification: law controls; keywords do not

Recorded citation: 27-3018(B); recorded infraction: 1C9. Primary legal issue: electrical code / permit issue. Interpretive issue: Electrical work/permit controls under historic code. This is a historical NYC electrical provision. Some infraction codes distinguish electrical work without a permit from failure to post a required electrical permit; confirm the actual charge.

What must be tested: Use licensed electrician inspection, circuit/panel schedule, DOB NOW/BIS electrical permit history, and dated conditions for the alleged location.

Possible exceptions and legal limitations: The electrical code edition, license requirement and work scope may change the route; do not treat a display allegation as proof of unsafe wiring. Eligibility is not established merely because the excerpt uses a word such as “repair”, “permit”, “cellar”, or “occupied”. Refer to NYC DOB construction codes.

Specific conditions mentioned in this inspector wording

Inspector wording mapped to testable facts

Passage 1 — ATOI AT A 2-STORY RESIDENTIAL HOME, I OBSERVED AT EXTERIOR AREA ELECTRICAL WWP, (1) NEW ROUGH WIRING, WITH RECEPTACLES OUTLET…

This recorded passage identifies a question about electrical installation and permit, not a proven final determination. Locate the exact wiring or equipment and determine whether the allegation is unsafe installation, unpermitted electrical work, posting, or inspection/permit status. The evidence for a missing electrical work permit is not identical to proof of defective circuitry or missing display.

Identifiers, locations, measurements and chronology to verify

Identified building exposure: 1

Use a labeled elevation/key plan and matching photos so findings relate to the correct building face.

Case-specific correction decision tree

Branch A — physical or documentary defect persists: evaluate risk and the controlling technical text, then select correction. Branch B — it was already compliant on the cited date: marshal contemporaneous approved records and site evidence. Branch C — scope, code edition or identification is wrong: prepare a fact-by-fact comparison to the actual summons and cited regulation before advancing a defense or revised filing.

First targeted evidence collection: Licensed-electrician site notes, panel/circuit identification, photos, electrical filing/permit history and test results when appropriate. This is an investigative request, not a claim that the work or evidence already exists.

Editorial closure of the shortened allegation — NOT source text

Verbatim excerpt ends: “H RECEPTACLES OUTLETS MOUNTED ON CMU WALL AT EXPOSURE #1 AND 4. (2)NEW BX CABLE ROUGH WIRING CONNECTED TO”. Non-source editorial completion (conditional reconstruction, not a quotation): “The allegation appears to concern electrical installation and permit; whether additional observations, directions, dates, measurements or exceptions followed is unknown and must be checked in the original summons.”

No missing words, dates, measurements, liability conclusion or regulatory remedy have been invented. Even if the final syllable looks obvious, completing it as a purported inspector quotation would misstate an official record.

Response, certification and closing evidence

A hearing defense, correction of the underlying condition, a DOB AEU Certificate of Correction and payment of an imposed penalty are distinct questions. Retrieve the summons and confirm the OATH hearing or outcome and DOB violation status. Under current DOB guidance, Certificate of Correction review requests are made in DOB NOW: Safety → Violations & Notices of Deficiency; submitter/certifier signatures and evidence requirements are case-specific. Refer to Certificate of Correction instructions.

Source record limitations: The dataset does not authenticate who inspected the property, why inspection started, whether a defense succeeded, which contractor made repairs or whether AEU later accepted a correction. Do not turn this example into a claimed client success story or an invented inspection history.

Primary authority and fact-check links

• OATH Summons Finder instructions (download actual summons) — enter summons 39181986Y and obtain the signed notice.
• NYC DOB construction codes — verify law wording and any exception.
• BIS / DOB NOW record limitations — older BIS violations may not be in DOB NOW.
• Certificate of Correction instructions — review current COC procedure, signatures and evidence.

Related library and official records

• Read NYC law section 27-3018(B)
• Read OATH infraction code 1C9
• All enforcement examples

Official sources: Search DOB records · DOB summonses · Certificate of Correction FAQs · OATH hearing options · Construction codes