• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia building envelope expert witnessAshburn Virginia architectural engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia civil engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia contractor expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction defect expert witnessAshburn Virginia window expert witnessAshburn Virginia delay claim expert witness
    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

    Pennsylvania Homeowner Blames Cracks on Chipolte Construction

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    Taking the Stairs to Human Wellness and Greener Buildings

    Duty to Defend Requires Payments Under Policy's Supplemental Payments Provision

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Homebuilders Opposed to Potential Change to Interest on Construction Defect Expenses

    Pipeline Safety Violations Cause of Explosion that Killed 8

    Right to Repair Reform: Revisions and Proposals to State’s “Right to Repair Statutes”

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    Sewage Treatment Agency Sues Insurer and Contractor after Wall Failure and Sewage Leak

    Manhattan Condo Resale Prices Reach Record High

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    Construction Defects Claims Can Be Limited by Contract Says Washington Court

    New Defendant Added to Morrison Bridge Decking Lawsuit

    Lakewood First City in Colorado to Pass Ordinance Limiting State Construction Defect Law

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Hawaii Supreme Court Construes Designated Premises Endorsement In Insured's Favor

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation

    Quick Note: Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

    Colorado Springs may be Next Colorado City to Add Construction Defects Ordinance

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    After Fatal House Explosion, Colorado Seeks New Pipeline Regulations

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    U.S. Homebuilder Confidence Rises Most in Almost a Year

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Insuring the Indemnitor's Obligation

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    Miller Law Firm Helped HOA Recover for Construction Defects without Filing a Lawsuit

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    The Riskiest Housing Markets in the U.S.

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem
    Corporate Profile


    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

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    November 20, 2013 —
    It’s been a good year for home builders in Kansas City, Missouri. In fact, it’s the best year since 2007. The total number of home permits issued through October exceeds the number issued in 2012 by 164, having reached 3,463. Sara Corless, executive vice president of the Builders Association, focused more on the growth, though she noted that some builders were hoping the year’s total would exceed 4,000, which she described as “a psychological victory at a minimum.” The Kansas City metropolitan area lead the state in the number of building permits issued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    May 27, 2011 —

    In Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Overlook, LLC, No. 4:10cv69 (E.D. Va. May 13, 2011), homeowner Edmonds sued insured developer/general contractor Overlook seeking damages resulting from defective Chinese drywall installed in Edmonds’ home. Overlook’s CGL insurer Nationwide defended Overlook under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action. The federal district trial court granted Nationwide’s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

    April 05, 2011 —

    Recently, the Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the decision in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company v Hathaway Development Company, Inc. stating that because Whisnant’s faulty workmanship caused damage to the surrounding properties, the construction defects constituted “occurrences” under the Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy. Unlike the South Carolina Supreme court ruling in the case of Crossman Communities v Harleysville Mutual, the Georgia Supreme Court stated that an accident can happen intentionally if the effect is not the intended result.

    Interestingly, the only dissenting judge, J. Melton, disagreed with his colleagues on the basis that “although the term ‘accident’ is not specifically defined in the policy, it is axiomatic that an ‘accident’ cannot result from ‘intentional’ behavior.” It is clear that what constitutes an occurrence in CGL policies is still being hotly debated.

    Read the full story...

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

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    January 17, 2013 —
    In a recent case, the Colorado Court of Appeals found that a contractor had a duty to a third party to warn it of a dangerous condition, even after the contractor had completed its work and the owner had accepted the contractor’s work.  Collard v. Vista Paving Corp., -- P.3d --, 2012 WL 5871446 (Colo. App. 2012).  While not an earth shattering or entirely new concept, the decision rendered in Collard directly accepted the foreseeability rule at the expense of the completed and accepted rule.  Id.
    In Collard, the City of Grand Junction (“the City”) hired Vista Paving Corp. (“Vista”) to construct two road medians according to the City’s plans and designs.  On July 9, 2007, Vista began work on the medians.  According to its contract with the City, Vista was responsible for traffic control during construction of the medians.  On July 19, 2007, Vista completed its construction of both medians.  On that date, the City’s project inspector conducted his final inspection of Vista’s work.  The City’s inspector then told Vista that its work had been completed and that Vista was authorized to leave the site.  Vista requested permission to remove the traffic control devices to which the City’s inspector agreed.  Vista removed all of its traffic control devices.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio
    Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at

    Drowning of Two Boys Constitutes One Occurrence

    August 06, 2014 —
    When two boys drowned at a summer camp, the issue arose as to whether there were one or two occurrences. Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. AXIS Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13176 (8th Cir. July 11, 2014). The two boys could not swim, and their camp permission forms indicated that they were non-swimmers. One night, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) had a pool party. After the party, the FCA staff realized the two boys were missing. They had drowned, and their bodies were found lying side-by-side at the bottom of the deep end of the pool. The death certificate for one boy listed the time of death as 10:44 p.m., while the other boy's time of death was listed as 10:42 p.m. The FCA was insured under three policies. AXIS Insurance Company insured FCA under a CGL policy with $1 million limits per occurrence and $5 million in the aggregate. The FCA also had two umbrella policies, one issued by Ironshore Speciality Insurance Company, which provided up to $10 million in coverage in excess of Axis's policy. Under the second umbrella policy, RSUI Indemnity Company covered up to $5 million in excess of the Axis and Ironshore policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    That’s What I have Insurance For, Right?

    December 31, 2014 —
    Ah, the age old question, What does my insurance really cover? A federal court in Georgia recently weighed in on this issue in Standard Contractors, Inc. v. National Trust Insurance Company, and ruled that a contractor’s commercial general liability insurer did not have to pay for damage caused by a subcontractor. Standard Contractors was hired to renovate the pool on an army base. Standard hired a subcontractor to for design and installation work. The subcontractor’s work was subpar in that the subcontractor omitted a number of parts, installed the wrong parts, and caused more than $400,000 in damage to the pool. Standard submitted a claim to its insurer seeking coverage for the loss under its commercial general liability policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    July 31, 2013 —
    The West Virginia Supreme Court previously held that construction defects were not covered under a CGL policy. The Court, however, reversed itself in Cherrington v. Erie Ins. Prop. & Cas. Co., 2013 W.Va. LEXIS 724 (W.V. June 18, 2013). The underlying complaint against the general contractor alleged various defects in the plaintiff’s recently constructed house, including an uneven concrete floor, water infiltration through the roof and chimney joint, a sagging support beam, and numerous cracks in the drywall walls and partitions throughout the house. Erie Insurance denied coverage. The insured general contractor sued, but the trial court found that faulty workmanship was not sufficient to give rise to an “occurrence.” The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed its prior rulings determining there was no coverage for construction defects. The court recognized its prior position was in the minority, as is Hawaii's position on coverage for construction defects. See Group Builders Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 123 Haw. 142, 148, 231 P.3d 67, 73 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010). Now joining the majority position, the West Virginia Supreme Court found that defective workmanship causing property damage was an “occurrence” under a CGL policy. Further, the homeowner had demonstrated that she sustained "property damage" as a result of the allegedly defective construction of her home. The trial court also determined that the business risk exclusions barred coverage. Again, the West Virginia Supreme Court disagreed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at

    Stop by BHA’s Booth at WCC and Support the Susan G. Komen Foundation

    May 12, 2016 —
    If you’re attending the annual West Coast Casualty Seminar at the Disneyland Hotel today and tomorrow, be sure to stop by the Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc., booth and Sink a Putt for Charity. This year, participant’s efforts on the green will help benefit the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure. As in years past, sink a putt in the BHA golf challenge and win a $25 Best Buy gift card, and for every successful putt made, BHA will make a $25 cash donation in the golfer’s name to the Susan G. Komen Foundation. New this year, BHA is hosting three Championship Rounds and during those periods BHA will double their charitable contributions. For every ATTEMPTED (sink or miss), BHA will make a $50 donation to Susan G. Komen, and for every putt MADE (sunk), the golfer will also win a $50 Best Buy gift card. Championship rounds are going on today between the times of 10:30am-10:45 am, 3:00pm-3:30pm, and 5:30pm-6:30pm. So be sure to get over to the BHA booth for your chance to support important cancer research as well as possibly taking home a nice gift card for yourself. BHA also wishes to thank Dave Stern for all of his hard work for the construction defect community in putting together this must go to seminar and for promoting such worthwhile charities each year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of