Skip to content
Violation library › Case analysis › 28-105.1
Inspector-description analysis · questions and answers

Windows, doors and openings: NYC DOB 28-105.1 / OATH summons 39168954N

Original enforcement allegation, not a proven case outcome. The quotation below is from an inspector-written description in a public-record dataset. Extracts may end mid-sentence. The inspection origin, complete supporting evidence, legal finding, and disposition have not been independently verified. Interpretive explanations below are explicitly analytical possibilities.
Law citation: 28-105.1OATH infraction: 101Summons: 39168954N

Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export

ATOI OBSERVED ALTERATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE TO ENTRY/ EXIT DOOR AT EXPOSURE 4 OF PROPERTY. DOOR SIZE HAS BEEN CHANGED IS 100% COMPLETED AND WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ONCE WINDOW ARE NOW REMOVED AND BRICKED. NO PER

Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 39168954N; BIN 3132623; export issue date 12/02/2025. 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 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 39168954N 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: 28-105.1; recorded infraction: 101. Primary legal issue: authorization of regulated work. Interpretive issue: Work requiring a permit. AC 28-105.1 is the general permit requirement for regulated building work; it is not a blanket declaration that every minor repair requires a permit.

What must be tested: Check the work actually performed, its timing, trade, approved plans, and permit history; compare against the permit exemptions in AC 28-105.4, related rules, and separately regulated trades.

Possible exceptions and legal limitations: The ordinary-repair/minor-alteration and emergency-work exceptions are fact-specific. Even permit-exempt work must satisfy other applicable law and may require licensed work or other agency approvals. Eligibility is not established merely because the excerpt uses a word such as “repair”, “permit”, “cellar”, or “occupied”. Refer to DOB permit exemptions, owner alterations.

Specific conditions mentioned in this inspector wording

1. Windows, doors and openings

Investigative test: Identify and dimension each named opening against approved elevations/floor plans and the impact on structure, egress or light/ventilation.

Evidence matched to this issue: Marked-up approved drawing, dated measured photos, specification and filing history for changed openings.

Boundary / potential counterexample: A replacement-in-kind and new structural opening are not the same scope; a permit exemption cannot be assumed.

2. Masonry or façade deterioration

Investigative test: Photograph and locate the defect by elevation and height; evaluate loose-material risk and whether exterior-wall/facade reporting rules apply.

Evidence matched to this issue: Elevation key and dated close-ups, Qualified Exterior Wall Inspector/engineering findings when relevant, protective plan and accepted post-repair inspection.

Boundary / potential counterexample: A material crack description is not a structural diagnosis; cyclical FISP applicability depends on building height and rule exceptions.

3. Means of egress and exit protection

Investigative test: Trace the occupant route from the cited point to discharge; check door swing, clear width, obstruction, illumination and the approved layout.

Evidence matched to this issue: Approved egress plan, location-labeled photos and measured clearance, fire/exit inspection records, dated removal or hardware repair evidence.

Boundary / potential counterexample: Do not advise blocking an occupied egress route as a temporary fix; applicability may differ for old and altered buildings.

Inspector wording mapped to testable facts

Passage 1 — ATOI OBSERVED ALTERATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE TO ENTRY/ EXIT DOOR AT EXPOSURE 4 OF PROPERTY.

This recorded passage identifies a question about means of egress and exit protection, not a proven final determination. Trace the occupant route from the cited point to discharge; check door swing, clear width, obstruction, illumination and the approved layout. Do not advise blocking an occupied egress route as a temporary fix; applicability may differ for old and altered buildings.

Passage 2 — DOOR SIZE HAS BEEN CHANGED IS 100% COMPLETED AND WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ONCE WINDOW ARE NOW REMOVED AND BRICKED.

This recorded passage identifies a question about windows, doors and openings, not a proven final determination. Identify and dimension each named opening against approved elevations/floor plans and the impact on structure, egress or light/ventilation. A replacement-in-kind and new structural opening are not the same scope; a permit exemption cannot be assumed.

Passage 3 — NO PER

The negative/deficiency wording is an inspector allegation about a missing, failed or unsafe condition. Determine precisely which component, obligation and time period the asserted absence covers. The supporting documents must establish or rebut the condition on the offense date, not merely its condition today.

Identifiers, locations, measurements and chronology to verify

Job, permit or filing identifier: ERATIONS
Query the exact application/permit; compare the authorized work description with inspection observations, dates and sign-off.
Identified building exposure: 4
Use a labeled elevation/key plan and matching photos so findings relate to the correct building face.

Case-specific correction decision tree

Branch A — work required a permit and lacked one: stop any unauthorized work and evaluate a lawful filing/approved correction or removal, including penalties and inspections. Branch B — minor repair or other exemption is claimed: document work scope and the particular exemption in AC 28-105.4 and 1 RCNY 101-14. Branch C — permit existed: compare permit scope, issuance and work dates; a different permit does not automatically authorize the cited operation.

First targeted evidence collection: Marked-up approved drawing, dated measured photos, specification and filing history for changed openings. 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: “N CHANGED IS 100% COMPLETED AND WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ONCE WINDOW ARE NOW REMOVED AND BRICKED. NO PER”. Non-source editorial completion (conditional reconstruction, not a quotation): “The allegation appears to concern windows, doors and openings; 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

Related library and official records

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

Need a resolution plan tied to the full summons?

Building Violation LLC can review the violation wording, permits, drawings, correction evidence and available OATH hearing procedures. A web example is not a determination of compliance for any property.

Call (866) 545-4440