• low-income housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania landscaping construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania retail construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania custom homes expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania institutional building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania casino resort expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania hospital construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania Subterranean parking expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania condominiums expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania concrete tilt-up expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania production housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania high-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania tract home expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania office building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania mid-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania parking structure expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania multi family housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania townhome construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania structural steel construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania industrial building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania condominium expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania custom home expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania
    New Washington Pennsylvania contractor expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania construction expertsNew Washington Pennsylvania expert witness concrete failureNew Washington Pennsylvania hospital construction expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania construction safety expertNew Washington Pennsylvania architectural engineering expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania consulting engineers
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    New Washington, Pennsylvania

    Pennsylvania Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 1875 stipulates that “no later than 90 days before filing an action, serve written notice of claim on the contractor. Upon receipt of notice, builder has 15 days to forward the claim to any subcontractor/supplier and 30 days after service of notice to offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment without inspection, propose to inspect the dwelling that is the subject of the claim; or reject the claim. Contractor has 14 days after inspection to provide written notice of intention.”

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines New Washington Pennsylvania

    No state license required. For public works projects, see General Services website.

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Adams County
    Local # 3920
    PO Box 3321
    Gettysburg, PA 17325
    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Fayette County
    Local # 3961
    PO Box 1323
    Uniontown, PA 15401
    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Somerset Co Builders Association
    Local # 3958
    PO Box 221
    Berlin, PA 15530

    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Franklin County Builders Association
    Local # 3912
    1102 Sheller Ave Ste C
    Chambersburg, PA 17201

    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Philadelphia
    Local # 3946
    1735 Market St Ste A432
    Philadelphia, PA 19103

    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Chester & Delaware Co
    Local # 3941
    1502 McDaniel Dr
    West Chester, PA 19380

    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    York County Builders Assn
    Local # 3972
    540 Greebriar Road
    York, PA 17404

    New Washington Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For New Washington Pennsylvania

    Dallas Home Being Built of Shipping Containers

    Appeals Court Overruled Insured as Additional Insured on Subcontractor’s Commercial General Liability Policy

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    Another TV Fried as Georgia Leads U.S. in Lightning Costs

    Mediation Scheduled for Singer's Construction Defect Claims

    Perovskite: The Super Solar Cells

    Pentagon Has Big Budget for Construction in Colorado

    New York Developer’s Alleged Court Judgment Woes

    Leaky Wells Spur Call for Stricter Rules on Gas Drilling

    Commercial Construction Heating Up

    Speculative Luxury Homebuilding on the Rise

    Zillow Seen Dominating U.S. Home Searches with Trulia

    Apartment Boom in Denver a Shortcut Around Condo Construction Defect Suits?

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Building Permits Hit Five-Year High

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims

    Work without Permits may lead to Problems Later

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    San Francisco Museum Nears $610 Million Fundraising Goal

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    Pennsylvania Modular Home Builder Buys Maine Firm

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Insurers Get “Floored” by Court of Appeals Regarding the Presumptive Measure of Damages in Consent Judgments

    Housing-Related Spending Makes Up Significant Portion of GDP

    Serial ADA Lawsuits Targeting Small Business Owners

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    San Diego: Compromise Reached in Fee Increases for Affordable Housing

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Not to Miss at This Year’s Archtober Festival

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    U.S. Home Prices Climbed 0.1% in July as Gains Slowed

    City and Contractor Disclaim Responsibility for Construction Error that Lead to Blast

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    TRI Pointe Merges with Weyerhaeuser’s Real Estate Company

    Contractors Sued for Slip

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Investigation Continues on Children Drowning at Construction Site
    Corporate Profile


    The New Washington, Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 4,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to New Washington'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
    New Washington, Pennsylvania

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    January 06, 2012 —

    Quoting one homeowner as saying that his house “can fall in the ground for all I care, I made my money,” the Tampa Bay Times looks at the issue of sinkhole claims in Florida. Homeowners “have paid off mortgages, put in pools, replaced roofs, or otherwise used money from sinkhole claims to do something besides fix sinkhole damage.

    It’s been tough for insurance companies. Citizens Property Insurance took in $32 million in premiums for sinkhole coverage in 2010, but paid out $245 million in sinkhole claims. The Tampa Bay Times notes that some of those claims come from settling problems caused by their repairs, including one settlement of $350,000 for repairs to a house worth $39,000.

    One couple, after receiving $217,000 from Citizens, sold the house to a company that bought unrepaired sinkhole homes for $190,000. The home has been sold since and remains unrepaired.

    Sometimes the preferred solution by the insurance company isn’t the cheapest either. One couple was informed that Citizens was going to spend $150,000 to have the hole filled with grout. After they settled with the insurance company, they fixed the problem by installing steel piers, at a cost of about $45,000.

    Read the full story…

    Drop in Civil Trials May Cause Problems for Construction Defect Cases

    August 27, 2013 —
    Over the last fifty years, the number of lawsuits that have been settled by trial have dropped sharply, according to Kenneth Childs, writing in the Idaho Business Review. Childs notes that in 1962, 11.5% of federal civil cases were resolved at trial, but in 2002, only 1.8 % percent went to trial. He makes the supposition that, due to their complexity, construction defect trials are even less likely to be resolved at trial. Instead, they are being resolved in mandatory arbitration. Views on arbitration have changed over the years and the courts have gone from what he describes as “somewhat hostile to it” to embracing, encouraging, and even mandating it. Childs notes there are some problems to this climate of arbitration. He notes that arbitrators can “operate by their own rules and according to their own standards.” The decisions made by arbitrators “are not subject to appellate review,” which allows arbitrators “to ignore the law entirely.” Read the full story...

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    July 02, 2014 —
    James R. Lynch of Ahlers & Cressman, PLLC, has published the first two parts of the four-part “Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions” series: “As a powerful mechanism to control contract risk, increase predictability, and reduce the cost and complexity of potential disputes, we frequently recommend that our clients’ contracts include a mutual waiver of consequential damages.” The first part “explains the significance of such a clause and the risk a contractor assumes without it,” while the second part discusses “the various categories of damages flowing from a breach of contract and conclude[s] with examples of how parties can limit these damages to reflect their agreed allocation of risk.” Read the full story, Part 1... Read the full story, Part 2...

    Case-Shiller Redo Shows Less Severe U.S. Home-Price Slump

    September 03, 2014 —
    The collapse in U.S. home prices that stoked the worst recession since the Great Depression wasn’t quite as severe as initially estimated, according to data from S&P/Case-Shiller. Property values nationally fell 26 percent from the February 2007 peak to the December 2011 trough, not 34 percent as previously reported, revised data showed last week. The index will now be issued monthly rather than quarterly. The change is the result of CoreLogic Inc. (CLGX)’s $6 million purchase of the S&P/Case-Shiller index from technology company Fiserv Inc. in March 2013. Case-Shiller has spent more than a year retrofitting its model with CoreLogic’s bigger, higher-quality data set, leading to a change in how the index looks. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lorraine Woellert, Bloomberg
    Ms. Woellert may be contacted at

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    June 26, 2014 —
    According to The Real Deal, L Lofts condominium developers are involved in an eight million dollar lawsuit for “allegedly failing to correct extensive construction defects in the” Brooklyn, New York “building, including water leaks, defective roof construction and other alleged code violations.” The L Lofts’ board filed suit against the American Development Group on June 19th. However, Perry Finkelman, partner and managing director at American Development Group claimed that the building had been hit by a tornado, making the allegations baseless: “While there may be issues, they weren’t properly addressed at the time. That’s not a sponsor’s responsibility to handle,” as quoted by The Real Deal. Read the full story...

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    December 09, 2011 —

    The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Peters v. Marque Homes. In this case, Walter Peters provided the land and funding for Marque Homes to build a luxury residence in Glendale, Arizona. By the terms of the “Joint Venture Agreement,” Peters provided the land and funding, while Marque would not charge Peters for overhead, profits, or supervision fees. The agreement specified that profits would be divided equally.

    Two years later, Marque sued Peters claiming he had breached his obligations by refusing several offers for the home. Peters replied that Marque had “failed to complete the home so it is habitable to prospective purchasers.” Peters stated he had “retained an expert inspector who had identified numerous defects.” The court appointed a Special Commissioner to list the home for sale. Peters purchased the home with two stipulations ordered by the court. At this point, the earlier case was dismissed with prejudice.

    Peters then sued Marque “asserting express and implied warranty claims arising out of alleged construction defects in the home.” Marque claimed that Peters’s claims were “precluded by the prior joint venture dispute.” The court granted Marque’s motion.

    The appeals court reversed the lower court’s decision, determining that Peters’s claims were not precluded by the agreement. Although there had been a prior case between the two parties, warranty issues did not form a part of that case. “Peters never raised these allegations nor presented this evidence in support of any warranty claim.”

    The court also noted that the “parties never agreed to preclude future warranty claims.” Marque and Peters “agreed in the stipulated sale order that ‘the sale of the property to a third party shall be “as is” with a 10-year structural warranty.’” The court noted that the agreement said nothing about one of the parties buying the house.

    The appeals court left open a claim by Marque that there are no implied or express warranties available to Peters. They asked the Superior Court to address this.

    Read the court’s decision…

    Perovskite: The Super Solar Cells

    July 23, 2014 —
    “Embedding solar cells into buildings has always been more of a nice idea instead of an economical approach,” according to Gigaom, however they reported that a new kind of solar cell developed by a researcher at Oxford University might change things. Henry Snaith and his research team through experimentation discovered “perovskites,” which increase the amount of sunlight converted to electricity by 17 percent over other solar cells. Solar cells currently used have, at times, proved inefficient. “Solar cells that won’t obstruct the view that a window offers historically have done poorly in converting much sunlight into electricity,” Gigaom reported. “Other types of solar cells have been too expensive to make. Plus, they won’t produce as much electricity when they line one side of a building rather than its rooftop, where they get sun for longer hours each day.” Currently, Oxford PV, the perovskite start-up company, is pushing into commercializing its solar technology, and “is looking at opening an office in Silicon Valley.” Read the full story...

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    March 26, 2014 —
    The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) published a news release that declared that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to expand the Clean Water Act “goes too far.” The EPA’s proposed expansion of the act would “increase the cost of new homes without a corresponding benefit to America’s lakes, rivers and other water bodies,” NAHB alleged. Kevin Kelly, NAHB president and a home builder and developer from Wilmington, Del., stated that the “EPA has added just about everything into its jurisdiction by expanding the definition of a ‘tributary’ – even ditches and manmade canals, or any other feature that a regulator determines to have a bed, bank and high-water mark. It’s a waste of taxpayer resources to treat a rainwater ditch with the same scrutiny as we would the Delaware Bay.” Read the full story...