BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia expert witness windowsAshburn Virginia expert witness roofingAshburn Virginia multi family design expert witnessAshburn Virginia architect expert witnessAshburn Virginia concrete expert witnessAshburn Virginia civil engineer expert witnessAshburn Virginia consulting general contractor
    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


    Are We Headed for a Work Shortage?

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    Multifamily Building Pushes New Jersey to Best Year since 2007

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    Construction Up in United States

    Incorporation, Indemnity and Statutes of Limitations, Oh My!

    Construction Defect Fund Approved for Bankrupt Las Vegas Builder

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Contractor Allegedly Injured after Slipping on Black Ice Files Suit

    Kumagai Drops Most in 4 Months on Building Defect: Tokyo Mover

    Mid-Session Overview of Colorado’s 2017 Construction Defect Legislation

    Tokyo's Skyline Set to See 45 New Skyscrapers by 2020 Olympics

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    He's the Top U.S. Mortgage Salesman. His Daughter Isn't Buying It

    Settlement Payment May Preclude Finding of Policy Exhaustion: Scottsdale v. National Union

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    Obama Says Keystone Decision May Be Announced in Weeks or Months

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    The Prompt Payment Rollercoaster

    Pancakes Decision Survives Challenge Before Hawaii Appellate Court

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Committeewoman Requests Refund on Attorney Fees after Failed Legal Efforts

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Limited Number of Insurance-Related Bills Passed by 2014 Hawaii Legislature

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    Construction Contract Clauses That May or May Not Have Your Vote – Part 3

    Residential Mortgage Lenders and Servicers Beware of Changes to Rule 3002.1

    How Berlin’s Futuristic Airport Became a $6 Billion Embarrassment

    New ANSI Requirements for Fireplace Screens

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Does the Implied Warranty of Habitability Extend to Subsequent Purchasers? Depends on the State

    You Don’t Have To Be a Consumer to Assert a FDUTPA Claim

    Las Vegas Harmon Hotel to be Demolished without Opening

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    #10 CDJ Topic: Carithers v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company

    Union THUGS Plead Guilty

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    Yellen Has Scant Power to Relieve U.S. Housing Slowdown

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    Putting for a Cure: Don’t Forget to Visit BHA’s Booth at WCC to Support Charity

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

    Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions – Changes and Claims

    West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar Returns to Anaheim May 15th & 16th

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute
    Corporate Profile

    ASHBURN VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Ashburn, Virginia Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    January 13, 2017 —
    The federal district court for the District of Hawaii continued its longstanding pattern of finding no coverage for claims based upon construction defects. Am. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Haw. Nut & Bolt, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174243 (D. Haw. Dec. 16, 2016). Safeway filed a complaint against Hawaii Nut & Bolt (HNB). The complaint involved issues pertaining to the construction of the roof deck at a Safeway store. HNB was a subcontractor hired to supply a coating system on the roof of the store to make it waterproof. The product was manufactured by VersaFlex. After the store opened, there were water leaks from the roof. This disrupted business operations and caused damage to Safeway's business and reputation. HNB tendered the claims to its CGL carrier, Fireman's Fund Insurance Corporation (FFIC). FFIC defended the underlying lawsuit for six years under a reservation of rights. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

    October 23, 2012 —

    Gene and Diane Melssen d/b/a Melssen Construction (“Melssen”) built a custom home for the Holleys, during which period of time Melssen retained a CGL insurance coverage from Auto Owners Insurance Company. Soon after completion of the house, the Holleys noticed cracks in the drywall and, eventually, large cracks developed in the exterior stucco and basement slab. Thereafter, the Holleys contacted Melssen, the structural engineer, an attorney, and Auto-Owners, which assigned a claims adjuster to investigate the claim.

    In April 2008, the Holleys sent Melssen a statutory notice of claim pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5 (“NOC”). In this NOC, the Holleys claimed approximately $300,000 in damages related to design and construction defects. The Holleys also provided a list of claimed damages and estimated repairs, accompanied by two reports from the Holleys’ consultant regarding the claimed design and construction defects. In June 2008, Melssen tendered the defense and indemnity of the claim to Auto-Owners. While Auto-Owners did not deny the claim at that time, it did not inspect the property or otherwise adjust the claim. Thereafter, in October 2008, Auto-Owners sent Melssen a letter denying coverage on the basis that the damage occurred outside of the applicable policy period.

    Ultimately, Melssen settled the claims against it for $140,000.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    July 14, 2016 —
    Paradoxically, Virtual Reality (VR) technologies are still lagging behind the visions that people have for their use. However, VR has already demonstrated its capacity to change the ways we design, make decisions about, and produce built environments. Is VR finally feasible? Two AEC Hackathons and meetings with certain startups have made me think that Virtual Reality (VR) might finally break through in construction. There are two reasons for my belief. Firstly, 3D and building information modeling (BIM) are widely adopted in the industry. The idea of virtual buildings and environments is nothing new and has become very natural. Secondly, there’s a growing interest in Gaming and Entertainment VR investments. This will push the technology forward and make it affordable to consumers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Spotting Problem Projects

    October 26, 2017 —
    Perhaps more than any other specialty contractor, electrical contractors bear the brunt of the “problem project.” Long after most other trades have completed their work and scattered in the wind, electrical contractors remain on site until the owner’s last inspection. And when the project is a “problem project,” the owner or prime contractor tend to liberally share their losses and liquidated damages among those specialty contractors remaining on site at the end. So what is an electrical contractor to do when the project starts coming off the rails? What is a Problem Project? First, it helps to identify the attributes of a problem project. While there are many negative qualities of a bad job, a problem project is one that busts budgets – whether labor, material, or time. Most commonly, the problem project will significantly exceed the labor budget. Because an electrical contractor’s most important (and understandably expensive) resource is its people, the labor budget is critical to the success of a job. When a project suffers delays or is ineptly managed, the labor costs soar, turning a potentially profitable job into a disaster. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Limitations on the Ability to Withdraw and De-Annex Property from a Common Interest Community

    October 10, 2013 —
    On February 28, 2013, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion with regard to the ability of an owner (and in this case, a real estate investment owner) to withdraw and de-annex lots from a common interest community. Specifically, in Vista Ridge Homeowners Ass’n., Inc. v. Arcadia Holdings at Vista Ridge, LLC, 300 P.3d 1004 (Colo. App. 2013), the Court denied Arcadia’s appeal of a lower Colorado District Court ruling which invalidated Arcadia’s attempt to withdraw and de-annex 70 single-family lots which it owned from the 94-lot Vista Ridge Filing No. 9. The applicable Declaration reserved the right to withdraw or de-annex any portion of the community in accordance with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA), and further limited such right to the extent that “no portion of the Property may be withdrawn or de-annexed after a Lot or Unit in that portion of the Property has been conveyed to an Owner other than a Declarant or a Builder.” The decision ultimately turned on the meaning of a “portion” of the property, as intended by CCIOA, and as applied to the specific language in the Vista Ridge Declaration. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lindenschmidt
    Derek Lindenschmidt can be contacted at lindenschmidt@hhmrlaw.com

    Construction Defect Fund Approved for Bankrupt Las Vegas Builder

    February 11, 2013 —
    A federal bankruptcy judge has given his approval to a fund set up to settle potential construction defect claims as a Las Vegas home builder, America West Development, works its way out of bankruptcy. The U.S. Trustee had objected to the trust fund's structure, and claimed that it was insufficiently independent from America West. Judge Mike Nakagawa found no legal objections to the trust. The trust will be initially funded from $1.5 million of the $10 million that Lawrence Canarelli will be paying to buy back the company he founded. Construction defect claims against the company could possibly reach $20.9 million. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports that the fund "could pick up funding from certain legal claims and insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    September 09, 2011 —

    The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals has upheld a summary judgment in the case of Franklin v. Mitchell. Walter Mitchell, doing business as Southern Classic Construction built a new home for the Franklins. The Franklins moved into the home in October 2001. In April 2006 they discovered sagging floors in both the bathroom and kitchen. They contacted Mitchell who suggested the flooring might be defective. The Franklins spent eight months attempting to contact the flooring manufacturer.

    In March 2007, the Franklins had the home inspected. The sagging was determined to be due to a loss of strength in the decking because of condensation from the air conditioning system. Air returns were not properly sealed and drawing moisture into the structure. There was mold on the decking and floor joints.

    When Mitchell was contacted by the Franklins, he told them his one-year warranty had expired but had the HVAC subcontractor, Southern Mechanical Heating & Air (owned by Mitchell’s father, Jim Mitchell), look at the situation. SMHA replaced and braced subfloors. Later, they entered the crawl space to tape ducts, seal the air return, and insulate the air vent housing. The Franklins were not satisfied with the repairs, as not all the ducts were taped, nor were the air vent housings insulated.

    Franklin complained to Walter Mitchell who again cited his one-year warranty. Jim Mitchell said he would not report complaints to his insurer, stating that the repairs were unnecessary, that the work had been done correctly in the first place, and it was only done at the request of Walter Mitchell.

    In February 2009, the Franklins sued Walker Mitchell. Mitchell denied the claims, citing in part the statute of limitations. Mitchell also filed complaints against three subcontractors, including his father’s firm. Mitchell received a summary judgment as the case started after Alabama’s six-year statute of limitations.

    The appeals court rejected the Franklin’s argument that the claim of damage did not start until they were aware it was due to a construction defect. The court noted that as Walter Mitchell was licensed as a “residential home builder, the statute the Franklins cite did not apply, as it concerns architects, engineers, and licensed general contactors.”

    Nor did they feel that Mitchells’ claim that his warranty had expired were sufficient to override the statute of limitations, quoting an earlier case, “Vague assurances do not amount to an affirmative inducement to delay filing suit.” Their claim of subsequent negligent repairs was rejected because Mitchell did not direct the specific actions taken by his father’s firm.

    Read the court’s decision…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subcontractors Essential to Home Building Industry

    February 14, 2014 —
    The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), Eye on Housing reports that subcontractors are essential to the home building industry—a point that is often overlooked by those outside of the industry. According to the NAHB, “71 percent of those employed in the home building industry are subcontractors.” The average number of subcontractors used in single-family detached homes in 2012 was twenty-five, however larger builders used more subcontractors: “On average, builders who built more than 25 units used 32 subcontractors during 2012, compared to 23 for builders who built less than 25 units.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of