BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia architecture expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witness roofingAshburn Virginia construction claims expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction cost estimating expert witnessAshburn Virginia architectural expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction expert witness public projects
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ashburn Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northern Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4840
    3901 Centerview Dr Suite E
    Chantilly, VA 20151

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    The Top of Virginia Builders Association
    Local # 4883
    1182 Martinsburg Pike
    Winchester, VA 22603

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Shenandoah Valley Builders Association
    Local # 4848
    PO Box 1286
    Harrisonburg, VA 22803

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Piedmont Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4890
    PO Box 897
    Culpeper, VA 22701

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Fredericksburg Area Builders Association
    Local # 4830
    3006 Lafayette Blvd
    Fredericksburg, VA 22408

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Augusta Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 4804
    PO Box 36
    Waynesboro, VA 22980

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
    Local # 4809
    PO Box 7743
    Charlottesville, VA 22906

    Ashburn Virginia Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Ashburn Virginia


    Home Buyers will Pay More for Solar

    Fannie Overseer Moves to Rescue Housing With Lower Risk to Lenders

    No Occurrence Where Contract Provides for Delays

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    Colorado Supreme Court Grants the Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    Colorado Hotel Neighbors Sue over Construction Plans

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    Professional Liability Alert: Joint Client Can't Claim Privilege For Communications With Attorney Sued By Another Joint Client

    Colorado Court of Appeals to Rule on Arbitrability of an HOA's Construction Defect Claims

    The Great Skyscraper Comeback Skips North America

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    FEMA Offers to Review Hurricane Sandy Claims

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Will Colorado Pass a Construction Defect Reform Bill in 2016?

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    The Texas Supreme Court Limits the Use of the Economic Loss Rule

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers

    Client Alert: Expert Testimony in Indemnity Action Not Limited to Opinions Presented in Underlying Matter

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    The Buck Stops Over There: Have Indemnitors Become the Insurers of First and Last Resort?

    How Well Do You Know the 2012 IECC Code?

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    #4 CDJ Topic: Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc.

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Be Proactive Now: Commercial Construction Quickly Joining List of Industries Vulnerable to Cyber Attacks

    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates

    University of Tennessee’s New Humanities Building Construction Set to Begin

    Beware: Hyper-Technical Labor Code Violations May Expose Employers to Significant Claims for Penalties under the Labor Code California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    General Liability Alert: ADA Requirements Pertaining to Wall Space Adjacent to Interior Doors Clarified

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Improperly Installed Flanges Are Impaired Property

    Brooklyn’s Industry City to Get $1 Billion Modernization

    New Orleans Reviews System After Storm Swamps Pumps

    City Drops Impact Fees to Encourage Commercial Development

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    Seattle Council May Take a New Look at Micro-Housing

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years
    Corporate Profile

    ASHBURN VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Ashburn, Virginia Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Ashburn's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Back to Basics: What is a Changes Clause?

    July 18, 2018 —
    The Changes Clause is one of the most important, perhaps the most important, provision in any construction contract. Project designs are rarely perfect. A Changes Clause provides a mechanism for dealing with such imperfections as well as allowing project owners the flexibility to update a project’s design as the project progresses. A good Changes Clause specifies when an owner can change the original scope of the contract, how the parties should resolve the value of the changed scope and when payment should be made to the contractor or a credit given to the owner. A good Changes Clause will also provide a mechanism for the contractor to notify the owner when it believes a change order is due and specify the time within which such notice must be given. For the contractor, failure to pay attention to the requirements of the Changes Clause can lead to forfeiture of the right to seek an adjustment to the contract value or contract completion date. For an Owner, failure to pay attention to and enforce the requirements of the Changes Clause can result in unnecessary payments to the Contractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of J. Cole Phillips, Smith Currie
    Mr. Phillips may be contacted at jcphillips@smithcurrie.com

    What Types of “Damages Claims” Survive a Trustee’s Sale?

    February 28, 2018 —
    Introduction Arizona’s trustee’s sale statutory scheme provides for the waiver of all defenses and objections to a trustee’s sale that: (i) are not raised prior to the sale, and (ii) do not result in an injunction against the sale going forward. See A.R.S. § 33-811(C). In other words, if you have an objection to a trustee’s sale, you must seek and obtain an injunction prior to the sale or your objection will be waived. Arizona’s Court of Appeals previously held that notwithstanding this statutory waiver, “common law” defenses to repayment of the debt survive a non-judicial foreclosure even in the absence of an injunction prior to the sale. See Morgan AZ Financial, L.L.C. v. Gotses, 235 Ariz. 21, 326 P.3d 288 (Ct. App. 2014). Our analysis of the Morgan decision can be found here. In Zubia v. Shapiro, 243 Ariz. 412, 408 P.3d 1248 (2018), the Arizona Supreme Court revisited the issue of what claims survive a trustee’s sale, and clarified that if a person fails to enjoin a trustee’s sale prior to its occurrence, then that person waives any and all damages claims dependent upon a trustee’s sale. That person does not, however, waive damages claims that are independent of the sale. Thus, determining what types of claims are “dependent” versus “independent” of a trustee’s sale is of critical importance to lenders and borrowers alike. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    Administration Seeks To Build New FBI HQ on Current D.C. Site

    February 28, 2018 —
    A Senate committee plans to examine a new $3.3-billion Trump administration proposal to demolish the Federal Bureau of Investigation's worn, outmoded headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C., and construct a new facility on that site. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Constructive Change Directives / Directed Changes

    June 06, 2018 —
    rime contracts typically contain a constructive change directive clause. A constructive change directive also goes by the acronym CCD (and for purposes of this article, such changes will be referred to as a CCD), however it can also be known as a Work Change Directive, Interim Directed Change, or Directed Change, depending on the type of contract beign utilized. An owner can order a CCD, versus issuing the contractor a formalized change order, as a mechanism to direct the prime contractor to perform work if there is a dispute as to contract amount, time, or scope. Just because an owner issues a CCD does not mean the owner is conceding that it owes the contractor a change order. Rather, the owner is ordering the CCD as a mechanism to keep the project moving forward notwithstanding a disagreement with the contractor as to the price or time impact. Standard form construction agreements such as the AIA, EJCDC, or ConsensusDocs, will have a standard provision dealing with change directives where the owner can order the contractor to proceed with work in the absence of a change order. In the federal government context, most construction contracts will contain a changes clause that authorizes the government to formally direct changes; and, there is authority for contractors to equitably pursue a constructive change based on certain directives or instructions issued by the government. Naturally, from the contractor’s perspective, this CCD provision is an important consideration as it could likely require the contractor to finance a change to the owner’s project, particularly if there is a scope dispute where the owner does not believe the contractor is entitled to any change order. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    May 30, 2018 —
    A differing site condition claim will almost universally result in both a cost and time impact. There will be additional, unanticipated costs incurred. And there will likely be a delay requiring additional time to perform. A Type I differing site condition claim is when the contractor encounters conditions at the site different than those indicated in the contract documents. That seems easy enough to prove, right. Nope. And, I mean nope! If you don’t believe me, consider the recent decision in Meridian Engineering Co. v. U.S., 885 F.3d 1351 (Fed.Cir. 2018). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    What are Section 8(f) Agreements?

    July 02, 2018 —
    Like many areas of federal labor law, there are different rules for construction industry employers. One major difference is in how employers become unionized. Typically, under Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, a union becomes a collective bargaining agent of employees only after a majority of employees show support for union representation. In other words, the employees chose whether to be represented by a particular union. However, under Section 8(f) of the NLRA, construction industry employers can choose to become union without any showing of majority support by employees. In fact, construction industry employers don’t need to have any employees at all to sign a “8(f) agreement.” Thus, these agreements have become known as pre-hire agreements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    A Good Examination of Fraud, Contract and Negligence Per Se

    February 28, 2018 —
    I have spoken on several occasions here at Construction Law Musings about the interplay (or lack thereof) between fraud and contract as it relates to construction in Virginia. The general rule is that fraud and contract claims don’t mix and a fraud claim in the face of a contractual one is likely to be dismissed. However, there are exceptions to this rule as there are to just about every legal rule (we construction lawyers would be out of a job without them). A good examination of the interplay between fraud and contract was set out by the Eastern District of Virginia federal court in Zuberi et al v. Hirezi et al. In that case the Zuberis purchased a home from the Hirezis and later filed suit alleging that the Hirezis concealed serious structural defects that made the house uninhabitable and unsellable. Among the many claims by the Zuberis were those fro fraud, fraudulent inducement, constructive fraud, negligence per se, violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act, and civil conspiracy. In short, they were out for blood. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    May 16, 2018 —
    In Rodriguez v. Department of Transportation, Case No. F074027 (March 27, 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District considered the following mind-twister: Can you knowingly approve something (which does not include something else) if you never considered the absence of that “something else?” Think about that for a moment . . . or, better yet, just read on. Rodriguez v. Department of Transportation In 2013, a pickup truck traveling westbound on State Route 152 toward Los Banos, California, ran off the road injuring Erik Rodriguez and the driver and killing another passenger. Rodriguez sued the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on the ground that the accident was caused by a dangerous condition on public property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com