Vacate order scope and posting / rescission: NYC DOB 28-207.4.4 / OATH summons 35729522L
Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export
REMOVED OR DEFACED A WRITTEN POSTED VACATE ORDER. NOTED: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION, VACATE ORDER #B190/19 ISSUED 06/18/2019. REMOVED STICKER#0P-64-25-00282 FROM FRONT ENTRY DOOR. POSTED ON 12/02/2025. PREVIOUS
Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 35729522L; BIN 3054395; export issue date 09/03/2026. 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 35729522L 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: 28-207.4.4; recorded infraction: 1G1. Primary legal issue: specific cited provision requiring manual cross-check. Interpretive issue: Vacate-order subsection: edition-sensitive. Subsection numbering for vacate-order tampering/posting and rescission has changed by code edition. An export label under 28-207.4.4 must be checked against the actual charged wording rather than automatically assuming which obligation it refers to.
What must be tested: If the allegation concerns a removed or defaced posted notice, compare posting evidence and order status; if it concerns rescission, check official action. Identify controlling edition and the specific OATH infraction.
Possible exceptions and legal limitations: Lawful rescission is an agency action, not simply a new paper posting. Do not infer unlawful reoccupancy from a posting allegation. 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. Vacate order scope and posting / rescission
Investigative test: Obtain the actual vacate order and determine the prohibited spaces, effective date, original posting and any written rescission.
Evidence matched to this issue: Signed and posted order, photos of postings, service/notice record, occupancy evidence and official rescission order if one exists.
Boundary / potential counterexample: A vacate order remains distinct from a stop-work order; removing a physical hazard does not by itself rescind the agency order.
Inspector wording mapped to testable facts
Passage 1 — REMOVED OR DEFACED A WRITTEN POSTED VACATE ORDER.
This recorded passage identifies a question about vacate order scope and posting / rescission, not a proven final determination. Obtain the actual vacate order and determine the prohibited spaces, effective date, original posting and any written rescission. A vacate order remains distinct from a stop-work order; removing a physical hazard does not by itself rescind the agency order.
Passage 2 — NOTED: AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION, VACATE ORDER #B190/19 ISSUED 06/18/2019.
This recorded passage identifies a question about vacate order scope and posting / rescission, not a proven final determination. Obtain the actual vacate order and determine the prohibited spaces, effective date, original posting and any written rescission. A vacate order remains distinct from a stop-work order; removing a physical hazard does not by itself rescind the agency order.
Passage 3 — REMOVED STICKER#0P-64-25-00282 FROM FRONT ENTRY DOOR.
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 4 — POSTED ON 12/02/2025.
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 5 — PREVIOUS
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
- Cited calendar date: 06/18/2019, 12/02/2025
- Check whether this is a permit expiry, previous summons issuance, reinspection or compliance deadline; each has a different consequence.
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: Signed and posted order, photos of postings, service/notice record, occupancy evidence and official rescission order if one exists. 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: “9 ISSUED 06/18/2019. REMOVED STICKER#0P-64-25-00282 FROM FRONT ENTRY DOOR. POSTED ON 12/02/2025. PREVIOUS”. Non-source editorial completion (conditional reconstruction, not a quotation): “The allegation appears to concern vacate order scope and posting / rescission; 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 35729522L 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.