Authorized use versus observed occupancy: NYC DOB 28-118.3.2 / OATH summons 35685958K
Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export
OCCUPANCY CONTRARY. AT TIME OF INSPECTION OBSERVED ATTIC LEVEL SET UP AND ARRANGED AS LIVING QUARTERS. OBSERVED KITCHENETTE W/ REFRIGERATOR AND MICROWAVE. 3 PIECE BATHROOM AND BEDROOM. REMEDY: COMPLY W/ C OF O
Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 35685958K; BIN 4210748; export issue date 05/15/2026. 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 35685958K 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: 28-118.3.2; recorded infraction: 103. Primary legal issue: authorized occupancy or use. Interpretive issue: Occupancy/use inconsistent with authorized records. AC 28-118.3.2 is used for occupancy or use inconsistent with the applicable certificate of occupancy or DOB records. Physical alterations and legal occupancy are different questions.
What must be tested: Compare the relevant historical/current C of O, approved plans and authorized use against the observed occupants, layout and use on the cited date. Determine whether cessation, restoration or a lawful change-of-use process is possible.
Possible exceptions and legal limitations: Older buildings may have lawful preexisting use established by historical records instead of a modern C of O; do not assume every mismatch can be legalized without zoning, egress and fire-safety review. 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
1. Authorized use versus observed occupancy
Investigative test: Identify each floor/unit and its claimed function and compare the C of O/authorized plan with actual use on the cited date.
Evidence matched to this issue: C of O and historical building records; dated layout/room photos, use documentation, rent/booking records only where genuinely relevant, and design-professional egress review.
Boundary / potential counterexample: Basement/cellar classification, legal dwelling status and transient-use rules are distinct determinations; do not conflate them.
2. Plumbing fixture and drainage configuration
Investigative test: Map each named fixture/connection to the approved layout and check who installed it and whether the work requires plumbing filing or licensed trade.
Evidence matched to this issue: Fixture schedule, riser drawings, photos, licensed-plumber report, permit history and test/inspection or abandonment proof.
Boundary / potential counterexample: A sink or drain alone does not prove creation of a lawful dwelling unit or justify a particular permit type.
Inspector wording mapped to testable facts
Passage 1 — OCCUPANCY CONTRARY.
This recorded passage identifies a question about authorized use versus observed occupancy, not a proven final determination. Identify each floor/unit and its claimed function and compare the C of O/authorized plan with actual use on the cited date. Basement/cellar classification, legal dwelling status and transient-use rules are distinct determinations; do not conflate them.
Passage 2 — AT TIME OF INSPECTION OBSERVED ATTIC LEVEL SET UP AND ARRANGED AS LIVING QUARTERS.
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.
Passage 3 — OBSERVED KITCHENETTE W/ REFRIGERATOR AND MICROWAVE. 3 PIECE BATHROOM AND BEDROOM.
This recorded passage identifies a question about plumbing fixture and drainage configuration, not a proven final determination. Map each named fixture/connection to the approved layout and check who installed it and whether the work requires plumbing filing or licensed trade. A sink or drain alone does not prove creation of a lawful dwelling unit or justify a particular permit type.
Passage 4 — REMEDY: COMPLY W/ C OF O
This recorded passage identifies a question about authorized use versus observed occupancy, not a proven final determination. Identify each floor/unit and its claimed function and compare the C of O/authorized plan with actual use on the cited date. Basement/cellar classification, legal dwelling status and transient-use rules are distinct determinations; do not conflate them.
Identifiers, locations, measurements and chronology to verify
No uniquely parseable earlier summons number, permit number, date, exposure or measurement is established by this excerpt. The full notice and building profile should supply the missing keys; do not invent them.
Case-specific correction decision tree
Branch A — observed use conflicts with lawful records: evaluate cessation/restoration with safe occupant arrangements, or a design-professional assessment for lawful amendment. Branch B — older lawful use is asserted: retrieve historical C of O or records establishing preexisting authorization. Branch C — factual error: document the actual number of units, room functions, occupancy pattern and inspection date without making unverified statements about tenants.
First targeted evidence collection: C of O and historical building records; dated layout/room photos, use documentation, rent/booking records only where genuinely relevant, and design-professional egress review. 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: “BSERVED KITCHENETTE W/ REFRIGERATOR AND MICROWAVE. 3 PIECE BATHROOM AND BEDROOM. REMEDY: COMPLY W/ C OF O”. Non-source editorial completion (conditional reconstruction, not a quotation): “The allegation appears to concern authorized use versus observed occupancy; 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 35685958K 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
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.