BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia soil failure expert witnessAshburn Virginia consulting general contractorAshburn Virginia construction expert testimonyAshburn Virginia construction expert witness consultantAshburn Virginia construction forensic expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction defect expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witness concrete failure
    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


    Housing Woes Worse in L.A. Than New York, San Francisco

    Are Construction Defect Laws Inhibiting the Development of Attached Ownership Housing in Colorado?

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    New Jersey’s Proposed Construction Defect Law May Not Cover Everything

    U.S. Navy Sailors Sue Tokyo Utility Company Over Radiation Poisoning

    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    Ornate Las Vegas Palace Rented by Michael Jackson for Sale

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Home Prices Up, Inventory Down

    Potential Problems with Cases Involving One Owner and Multiple Contractors

    Additional Insurance Coverage Determined for General Contractor

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Remembering Joseph H. Foster

    Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Negligence Claim Against Building Company Owner, Individually

    Environmental Suit Against Lockheed Martin Dismissed

    Quick Note: Submitting Civil Remedy Notice

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

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

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    No Escape: California Court of Appeals Gives a Primary CGL Insurer’s “Other Insurance” Clause Two Thumbs Down

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Las Vegas HOA Conspiracy & Fraud Case Delayed Again

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    BHA Has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports NCHV and Final Salute at 2017 WCC Seminar

    NYC’s First Five-Star Hotel in Decade Seen at One57 Tower

    Haight Attorneys Selected to 2018 Southern California Rising Stars List

    FEMA, Congress Eye Pre-Disaster Funding, Projects

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    Engineer TRC Fends Off Lawsuits After Merger

    Sales of New Homes in U.S. Increased 5.4% in July to 507,000

    Wage Theft Investigations and Citations in the Construction Industry

    How the Election Could Affect the Housing Industry: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    The “Up” House is “Up” for Sale

    Spotting Problem Projects

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Phoenix Flood Victims Can’t Catch a Break as Storm Nears

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    Things You Didn't Know About Your Homeowners Policy
    Corporate Profile

    ASHBURN VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Ashburn, Virginia Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Ashburn's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Owner Bankruptcy: What’s a Contractor to Do?

    February 28, 2018 —
    Bankruptcy of the owner or developer of a real estate construction project can be very unsettling to contractors. But a declaration of bankruptcy by the developer, in and of itself, does not constitute a breach of contract such that the contractor can stop working. Contract provisions providing that the contract is terminated if a party becomes insolvent or files for bankruptcy are generally unenforceable. Partially-performed construction contracts are executory contracts, meaning that the obligations of the parties to the contract have not yet been fully performed. The Bankruptcy Code allows a bankruptcy trustee (in a Chapter 7 dissolution case) or the debtor-in-possession (in a Chapter 11 reorganization case) either to assume or to reject an executory contract. A debtor-in-possession has until the time of the confirmation of its plan of reorganization to decide if it will assume or reject the contract. The contractor may ask the bankruptcy court to require the debtor-in-possession to make a decision on the contract sooner, but the court will most likely give the debtor-in-possession a fair amount of time to make the decision. Reprinted courtesy of Troy R. Covington and Stephen M. Parham, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Covington may be contacted at sparham@bloomparham.com Mr. Parham may be contacted at tcovington@bloom-law.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Open & Known Hazards Under the Kinsman Exception to Privette

    February 15, 2018 —
    Gonzalez v. Mathis, 2018 WL 718528 confirms the difficulties a defendant will face when trying to overcome the Kinsman exception to the Privette doctrine on a dispositive motion when dealing with an open and obvious hazard. There, a professional window washer fell off a roof while walking along a parapet wall constructed by the owner of a home. The window washer filed suit against the homeowner and alleged three dangerous conditions on the roof: (1) the parapet wall forced those who needed to access a skylight to walk along an exposed two-foot ledge that lacked a safety railing; (2) dilapidated and slippery roof shingles; and (3) the lack of tie off points that would allow maintenance workers to secure themselves with ropes or harnesses. The homeowner filed a motion for summary judgment under Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689 and its progeny which prohibits an independent contractor from suing his or her hirer for workplace injuries (“Privette doctrine”). There are two exceptions to the Privette doctrine. First, a hirer cannot avoid liability when he or she exercises control over the manner and means in which a contractor does his or her work and that control contributes to the injuries sustained – known as the “Hooker exception” (premised on the holding of Hooker v. Department of Transportation (2002) 27 Cal.4th 198). Second, a hirer may be found liable if he or she fails to warn the contractor of a concealed hazard on the premises – known as the “Kinsman exception” (premised on the holding of Kinsman v. Unocal Corp. (2005)). Reprinted courtesy of Frances Ma, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Ms. Ma may be contacted at fma@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    July 10, 2018 —
    On June 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided the case of Orchard Hill Building Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Court of Appeals vacated the decision of the District Court granting the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) motion for summary judgment dismissing the Orchard Hill Building Company’s (Orchard) complaint that the Corps’ jurisdictional determination erroneously found that the waters at issue were “jurisdictional waters” under the Clean Water Act (CWA) subject to the Corps’ jurisdiction. Acknowledging that the Corps and EPA had promulgated a new rule re-defining “waters of the United States” in 2015—which is now being challenged in the courts—the Court of Appeals noted that this case is controlled by the pre-2015 definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the Corps, directing it to determine if there was a significant nexus, as required. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    January 31, 2018 —
    According to a quick Google search the term “holding the bag” comes from the mid eighteenth century and means be left with the onus of what was originally another’s responsibility. Nobody wants to be left holding the bag. But that is the situation our client (subcontractor) found themselves in when upon completion of a public project the general contractor went out of business before paying the remaining amount due and owing to our client. Under Nebraska law, liens are not allowed against public projects. Instead the subcontractor is to make a claim on the payment and performance bond secured by the general contractor at the start of the project. In our case, the general contractor never secured a bond on which to make a claim; consequently, leaving our client holding the bag. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean Minaham, Lamson, Dugan and Murrary, LLP
    Mr. Minahan may be contacted at sminahan@ldmlaw.com

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    April 11, 2018 —
    Yesterday, the Herald reported that six schools and a nursery have been affected by construction defects in Edinburg. For every eight properties inspected by council, one was found to share analogous issues which caused “a wall to collapse at a city primary school in 2016.” Furthermore, over the course of eighteen months, inspectors will observe more buildings across Edinburg in order to guarantee their “structural safety.” At Oxgangs Primary School, during Storm Gertrude in January 2016, nine tons of masonry fell from the side of a building. The Herald reported 17 other schools across Edinburg closed due to safety concerns. All schools closed were part of the “same private finance initiative.” Moreover, there have been 20 other examples of defects found that are alike, in which checks were “carried out at public buildings.” Christine Jardine, a Scottish Liberal democrat who represents Edinburg West, states that the findings were “scandalous,” and “simply not good enough.” In addition, Jardine points out that the council is responsible for buildings to meet the highest of standards, and proper checks are necessary, in order to ensure the safety of their children. Lastly, Jardine suggests that the Scottish government should no longer rely on the funding from local authority. Instead, she proposes that the government must be accountable for “improving council funding.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    May 16, 2018 —
    Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies typically include a “your work” exclusion, excluding coverage for “’property damage’ to ‘your work’ arising out of it or any part of it and included in the ‘products-completed operations hazard.’” These CGL policies define “your work,” in pertinent part, as “work or operations performed by you or on your behalf.” (emphasis added). As the recent case of Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. JWN Construction, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20529 (S.D. Fla. 2018) reminds us, the “your work” exclusion can serve to eliminate coverage for a general contractor, even when property damage is caused by a subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John J. Kozak, Esq., Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Kozak may be contacted at john.kozak@csklegal.com

    Texas Supreme Court: Breach of Contract Not Required to Prevail on Statutory Bad Faith Claim

    June 06, 2018 —
    In USAA Texas Lloyds Company v. Menchaca, the Supreme Court of Texas clarified long-standing confusion regarding whether damages for bad faith are recoverable in the absence of a breach of contract under Texas law. The Menchaca case takes an in-depth dive into decades’ worth of Texas precedent and concludes that, under certain circumstances, an insured can recover policy benefits as damages for bad faith without finding that the insurer was in breach of contract. The story of this case begins with Hurricane Ike in September 2008. Homeowner Gail Menchaca contacted her homeowner’s insurance company, USAA Texas Llloyds Company (“USAA”) to report that the storm had damaged her home. USAA sent an adjuster to investigate the claim, and USAA determined that although the policy covered some of the damage, no benefits would be paid under the policy because the repair estimate did not exceed the policy deductible. Five months later, at Ms. Menchaca’s request, another USAA adjuster inspected the property and reached the same conclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com

    California Supreme Court Confirms the Right to Repair Act as the Exclusive Remedy for Seeking Relief for Defects in New Residential Construction

    February 22, 2018 —

    The California Supreme Court recently issued its decision on a critical issue in the residential construction industry – the claims for construction defects that a California homeowner can bring against a builder or seller of new residential properties in California.

    Holding

    In McMillin Albany v. The Superior Court of Kern County, the Court held that California’s Right to Repair Act (California Civil Code, sections 895, et seq.) (the “Act”) is the exclusive remedy for homeowners claiming defective construction of new residences in California.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brenda Radmacher, Gordon & Rees
    Ms. Radmacher may be contacted at bradmacher@grsm.com