BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia construction code expert witnessAshburn Virginia building consultant expertAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnessAshburn Virginia building code expert witnessAshburn Virginia roofing construction expertAshburn Virginia architecture expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Balfour Taps Qinetiq’s Quinn as new CEO to Revamp Builder

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Another Case Highlighting the Difference Between CGL Policies and Performance Bonds

    Legal Fallout Begins Over Delayed Edmonton Bridges

    Ex-Pemex CEO Denies Allegations of Involvement in Brazil Scandal

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ranked on the 2017 "Best Law Firms" List by U.S. News - Best Lawyers

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    The A, B and C’s of Contracting and Self-Performing Work Under California’s Contractor’s License Law

    Builder Exposes 7 Myths regarding Millennials and Housing

    Homebuilder Predictions for Tallahassee

    Louisiana District Court Declines to Apply Total Pollution Exclusion

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors

    Alleged Serious Defects at Hanford Nuclear Waste Treatment Plant

    A License to Sue: Appellate Court Upholds Condition of Statute that a Contracting Party Must Hold a Valid Contractor’s License to Pursue Action for Recovery of Payment for Contracting Services

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

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

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Waive Not, Want Not: Waivers and Releases on California Construction Projects

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twelve White and Williams Lawyers

    Harmon Towers to Be Demolished without Being Finished

    Sometimes it Depends on “Whose” Hand is in the Cookie Jar

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

    Smart Home Products go Mainstream as Consumer Demand Increases

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    California Condo Architects Not Liable for Construction Defects?

    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    Conflict of Interest Accusations may Spark Lawsuit Against City and City Manager

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    A Closer Look at an HOA Board Member’s Duty to Homeowners

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Bad Faith Claim

    Change #7- Contractor’s Means & Methods (law note)

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    Life After McMillin: Do Negligence and Strict Liability Causes of Action for Construction Defects Still Exist?

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

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

    Assignment Endorsement Requiring Consent of All Insureds, Additional Insureds and Mortgagees Struck Down in Florida

    How to Protect the High-Tech Home

    China Home Glut May Worsen as Developers Avoid Price Drop

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured
    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

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on August 30, 2017 There is no question that organization on the job site can mean the difference between efficient performance and costly errors. A simple mistake can cost a company thousands, which is why details are carefully articulated and supervisors become better scrutinizers than magazine editors. But for some reason, many companies don’t consider managing job site inventory under this same attentive category, or perhaps they don’t know about the technology available to help them do it. For contractors, keeping track of every piece of material and equipment lowers losses and keeps crews busy. This is especially true for contractors in the trades who often have specialized equipment in inventory such as power supplies, HVAC “smart energy” components or inspection equipment. Once everything is accounted for, the possibility of loss is decreased and there’s a chance to evaluate the use of all materials and equipment. This can show the efficiency of allotted resources. Is there enough equipment on the site to get tasks completed? Is there a need for more? Less? Having excess equipment can sometimes prepare a crew for problem scenarios. But it can also mean the construction company is overpaying for unneeded resources. However, the only way to know is by effectively managing job site inventory. That includes all equipment and materials Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica Stark, Construction Informer

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    March 22, 2018 —
    Based on recent fire test results, mass timber groups have adjusted product certification standards to require the use of cross-laminated timber with structural adhesives tested to demonstrate better fire performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    February 07, 2018 —
    In September 2017, a Texas Federal district judge ruled that that Personal and Advertising Injury coverage in a CGL policy did not require physical occupancy in a landlord-tenant dispute. In the underlying lawsuit, restaurant owner Ziggy Gruber alleged that John Dunn, the landlord of a Houston shopping center, wrongfully interfered with his right of occupancy at the shopping center by failing to complete the negotiation of a lease and preventing his occupancy of the space. Gruber further alleged that he had acquired a direct interest in the premises and became a rightful tenant but as a result of Dunn’s interference, he was never able to open his restaurant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Afua Akoto, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Akoto may be contacted at asa@sdvlaw.com

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    December 20, 2017 —
    The Florida Supreme Court issued its opinion in Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., Case No., SC16-1420, which answered the following certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit: Is the notice and repair process set forth in Chapter 558 of the Florida Statutes a “suit'” within the meaning of the CGL policies issued by C&F to ACI? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Chiocca, Cole Scott & Kissane P.A.
    Mr. Chiocca may be contacted at john.chiocca@csklegal.com

    Maryland Legislation Prohibits Condominium Developers from Shortening Statute of Limitations to Defeat Unit Owner Construction Defect Claims

    May 16, 2018 —
    New Maryland legislation prevents developers from shortening the time period within which condominium associations and their unit owner members can assert claims for hidden construction defects in newly constructed condominium communities. The legislation known as HB 77 and SB 258 passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Lawrence J. Hogan on April 24, 2018 (see photo above). Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq. is the author of the legislation, which will be codified as Section 11-134.1 of the Maryland Condominium Act, effective October 1, 2018. This article discusses how this new legislation ends the practice by which some condominium developers attempted to use condominium documents to shorten the normal statute of limitations in order to prevent condominium associations and their unit owner members from having a fair opportunity to assert their warranty and other legal claims for latent construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Esq., Cowie & Mott
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at ndc@cowiemott.com

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    February 07, 2018 —
    McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court (01.18.18) ____ Cal.4th _____ (2018 WL 456728) The California Supreme Court confirmed that the Right to Repair Act (CA Civil Code § 895, et seq. and often referred to by its legislative nomenclature as “SB800”) applies broadly to any action by a residential owner seeking recovery of damages for construction defects, regardless of whether such defects caused property damages or only economic losses. This includes the right in the Act of the builder to attempt repairs prior to the owner filing a lawsuit. Background Homeowners sued builder for construction defects. Included in their causes of action was a cause of action for violation of the Right To Repair Act. The Act requires that before filing litigation, a homeowner must give the builder notice and engage in a nonadversarial prelitigation process which gives the builder a right to repair the defects. The builder asked the court to stay the homeowners’ action so the prelitigaiton process could be undertaken. Rather than give the builder the repair right, the homeowners dismissed the particular cause of action from their case, leaving only other so-called common law and warranty causes of action. The common law claims sought recovery for property damage caused by the defects. The builder nonetheless asked to the Court to stay the action so it could exercise its right to repair. The trial court, relying on Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, denied builder’s request to stay the action. The Liberty Mutual Court concluded that certain common law construction defect claims fell outside the purview of the Act. Builder appealed. The Court of Appeal disagreed with Liberty Mutual, so did not follow it, granted the builder’s request for a stay, and directed that the homeowners afford the builder the right to repair the claimed defects as provided under the Act. The California Supreme Court affirmed, disapproving Liberty Mutual and the subsequent cases relying on it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Wallace, Smith Currie
    Mr. Wallace may be contacted at swwallace@smithcurrie.com

    Contractor’s Charge Of Improvements To Real Property Not Required For Laborers To Have Lien Rights

    June 13, 2018 —
    In Washington, persons furnishing labor, professional services, material, or equipment for improvements of real property are generally entitled to a lien on that property, but only if their labor is furnished at the direction of the owner or the owner’s “construction agent.”[1] Whether a lien attaches, therefore, can turn on whether the person directing work is the owner’s construction agent. Washington’s mechanic’s lien statute defines “construction agent” as “any registered or licensed contractor, registered or licensed subcontractor, architect, engineer, or other person having charge of any improvement to real property, who shall be deemed the agent of the owner for the limited purpose of establishing the lien created by this chapter.”[2] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matt T. Paxton, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Paxton may be contacted at matt.paxton@acslawyers.com

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    December 20, 2017 —
    On November 14, 2017, the Court of Appeals (Division 1), in Offerman v. Granada, LLC, 2017 WL 5352664, reversed a trial court order directing specific performance of an alleged option to purchase real property, holding that the alleged option was too indefinite to be specifically performed because the parties did not agree to all of the material terms of the option. Tenant-Purchaser Offerman executed a two-year lease with Landlord-Seller Granada, which granted Offerman “the option to purchase [the] property…for a sales price to be determined at that time by an independent appraiser acceptable to both Tenant and Landlord. (Terms and Conditions to be stipulated by both parties at such time).” (emphasis added). Offerman timely advised Granada he intended to exercise the option, asked Granada to name an appraiser, and, when Granada did not respond, Offerman tendered a $240,000 appraisal to exercise the option. Granada did not retain an appraiser but instead simply demanded $350,000 to close the sale. After a bench trial, the Court determined that Offerman was entitled to specific performance, and, as the parties had not agreed to certain terms, held a second evidentiary hearing to resolve the form of judgment, therein naming a title agency to handle the escrow, setting a closing date, allocating the transaction fees between the parties, and ordering Granada to pay for the property inspection. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Herold, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Herold may be contacted at rherold@swlaw.com