Required access to permitted work: NYC DOB 28-116.1 / OATH summons 39152065R

Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export

AT TIME OF INSPECTION WAS DENIED ACCESS BY UNKNOWN MALE WORKERS FOR PERMITTED JOB NO. Q01236126-I1., PROVIDE ACCESS AND/OR EXPOSURE TO ONGOING CONSTRUCTION OR WORK

Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 39152065R; BIN 4245753; export issue date 06/26/2025. 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 export field may still omit pages, attachments or context contained in the actual summons.

Get the complete, authentic notice: search summons 39152065R 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: 28-116.1; recorded infraction: 2A7. Primary legal issue: specific cited provision requiring manual cross-check. Interpretive issue: Required inspection access and exposed construction. AC 28-116.1 places inspection obligations on permit-required work: the work must remain accessible and exposed for inspection, and the permit holder must enable access. This is not an allegation that every visible item is inherently defective.

What must be tested: Compare permit-holder identity, inspection request, time/site access, status of concealing construction, and whether the inspector was denied an opportunity to see ongoing work.

Possible exceptions and legal limitations: Whether the cited inspection requirement applied depends on the permit/work stage; secure the actual inspection notes and consider any documented access or timing discrepancy. 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 — AT TIME OF INSPECTION WAS DENIED ACCESS BY UNKNOWN MALE WORKERS FOR PERMITTED JOB NO.

This recorded passage identifies a question about required access to permitted work, not a proven final determination. Identify the permit holder, inspection request, allowed access path and which work was or was not exposed at the relevant time. A denial-of-access allegation is not itself proof that concealed construction violates the technical code.

Passage 2 — Q01236126-I1., PROVIDE ACCESS AND/OR EXPOSURE TO ONGOING CONSTRUCTION OR WORK

Treat this passage as an asserted observation or reference. Check the named location, actor, object and time against contemporaneous photos and official filing records before drawing a regulatory conclusion.

Identifiers, locations, measurements and chronology to verify

Job, permit or filing identifier: Q01236126-I1

Query the exact application/permit; compare the authorized work description with inspection observations, dates and sign-off.

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: Permit history, scheduling/inspection log, gate/entry photos, contractor communication and accounts from persons present. This is an investigative request, not a claim that the work or evidence already exists.

Editorial closure of the shortened allegation — NOT source text

The visible description does not show the same clear character-limit truncation flag, but additional pages or attachments may still exist. No editorial sentence is treated as part of the inspector’s wording.

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 39152065R 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 28-116.1
• Read OATH infraction code 2A7
• All enforcement examples

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