• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia building code compliance expert witnessAshburn Virginia hospital construction expert witnessAshburn Virginia multi family design expert witnessAshburn Virginia civil engineer expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnessesAshburn Virginia fenestration expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witness roofing
    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

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    School Blown Down by Wind Still Set to Open on Schedule

    London’s Best Districts Draw Buyers on Italian Triple Dip

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

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

    Blackstone to Buy Chicago’s Willis Tower for $1.3 Billion

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Court Finds That Split in Underground Storage Tank is Not a Covered Collapse

    Are Housing Prices Poised to Fall in Denver?

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    California Supreme Court Upholds Precondemnation Procedures

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

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

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    Locals Concerns over Taylor Swift’s Seawall Misdirected

    Should CGL Insurer have Duty to Defend Insured During Chapter 558 Notice of Construction Defects Process???

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    New Jersey’s Independent Contractor Rule

    Research Institute: A Shared Information Platform Reduces Construction Costs Considerably

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Tips for Contractors Who Want to Help Rebuild After the California Wildfires

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    Texas LGI Homes Goes After First-Time Homeowners

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Construction Contract Clauses Which Go Bump in the Night – Part 1

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Bad Faith Jury Verdict Upheld After Insurer's Failure to Settle Within Policy Limits

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold Due to Insurer

    Contractor Allegedly Stole Construction Materials

    Hawaii Court Looks at Changes to Construction Defect Coverage after Changes in Law

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    I’m Sorry, So Sorry: Legal Implications of Apologies and Admissions of Fault for Delaware Healthcare Professionals

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Manhattan Home Sales Rise at Slower Pace as Prices Jump

    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim
    Corporate Profile


    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

    Question of Parties' Intent Prevents Summary Judgment for Insurer

    December 02, 2015 —
    The insurer's and insured's intent as to which entities were to be insured prevented the insurer's motion for summary judgment. Chaus v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136311 (E.D. La. Oct. 5, 2015). Water damage from a broken pipe occurred at the insured's building. Blaze Chaus LLC owned the building.The building was occupied by two entities which provided health care services: Dr. Kelly G. Burkenstock, M.D. and Azure Spa, Inc. Dr. Burkenstock was the sole owner of all three entities. The application for commercial insurance was submitted by "Dr. Kelly G. Burkenstock, d/b/a/ Blaze Chaus LLC." The application requested a "Physicians and Surgeons Endorsement" and reflected that the business activities of the applicant as "Internal Medicine Doctor." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    November 05, 2014 —
    ABC News reported that US Construction spending was down again in September, though housing had a slight rebound. "Construction spending dropped 0.4 percent in September compared to August when spending fell 0.5 percent, the Commerce Department reported Monday," as quoted by ABC News. However, "expectation is that further gains in construction will help support growth this quarter and into next year. Many economists are looking for the economy to grow at a 3 percent rate in the final three months of this year and average 3 percent in 2015 as well," according to ABC News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Heathrow Tempts Runway Opponents With $1,200 Christmas Sweetener

    December 15, 2016 —
    Heathrow Airport Ltd. will offer hundreds of homeowners a 1,000-pound ($1,200) festive sweetener to participate in environmental studies vital to expediting planning for its controversial 16 billion-pound third runway. The owners of houses and farmland on which the new landing strip is due to be built will qualify for the payment in return for agreeing to a handful of visits over about two years, Heathrow Chief Executive Officer John Holland-Kaye said in an interview. The surveys are required to establish the site’s wildlife value. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Jasper, Bloomberg

    In Real Life the Bad Guy Sometimes Gets Away: Adding Judgment Debtors to a Judgment

    January 05, 2017 —
    As most litigators will tell you a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit needs to be able to prove both liability and damages to win a case. That is, you need to show both that the defendant is liable under the law and that you have suffered damages as a result. Proving one but not the other and you’ll lose the case. But there’s one other consideration that is just as important, albeit often elusive, and that is, collectability. Even if you win the case, if you can’t collect on the judgment, you might as well have lost. The following case, Wolf Metals, Inc. v. Rand Pacific Sales, Inc., California Court of Appeals for the Second District, Case No. B264002 (October 25, 2016), describes some of the remedies available, procedures to follow, and difficulties confronted when obtaining a default judgment against a judgment-proof defendant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    March 19, 2014 —
    The California Supreme Court surprised everyone on December 11, 2013 when it denied Brookfield Homes’ request for review of the ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC (2014) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which was decided by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District Division Three (Orange County). In that case the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act aka SB800 is not the exclusive remedy for a homeowner seeking damages for construction defects that have resulted in property damage. Under the ruling, homeowners may choose to sue builders under common law theories of liability such as strict liability and negligence, in addition to liability under the Act. This ruling made homeowners' compliance with the prelitigation requirements of the Act optional and thereby put builders' “right to repair” in jeopardy. The ruling undermined the expectations of California's homebuilders who, for the past decade, understood that their liability is limited by the Act and that they have a right to repair. Since the Liberty Mutual case was handed down, the topic has become a hotbed item with several divisions of the Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Three (Los Angeles County) issued a ruling against Premier Homes in the case of Burch v. Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 159 that, without independent analysis, simply adopted the holding in the Liberty Mutual case. But on February 21, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Four (Los Angeles County) ruled in the case of KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v.Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 167 that a homeowner's failure to give the builder an opportunity to inspect and repair a construction defect excused the builder's liability under the Act. Additionally, the Court of Appeal went out of its way to state it had ruled earlier in that case that the Act is the exclusive remedy. The various rulings lay a foundation for ultimate intervention by the California Supreme Court. In the meantime, these opposing cases will be cited by counsel for homeowners and builders alike for opposing positions as they continue to navigate construction defect disputes. Mr. Byassee is a strategic litigator specializing in representation of builders and developers. For more information regarding dispute resolution procedures under SB800, Mr. Byassee may be contacted at (949) 250-9797 or by email at Published courtesy of David J. Byassee, Ulich & Terry LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    August 06, 2014 —
    Indirect notice to the insurer was sufficient to trigger coverage for the additional insured under a liability policy. Spoleta Constr., LLC v. Aspen Ins. UK Ltd., 2014 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5174 (N.Y. App. Div. July 11, 2014). An employee of the subcontractor was injured at the construction project on October 20, 2008. The general contractor was named as an additional insured on the subcontractor's CGL policy with Aspen. Under the subcontract, the subcontractor also agreed to defend and indemnify the general contractor for all claims arising out of the subcontractor's work. The general contractor did not receive notice of the accident until late December 2009 in a letter from the injured employee's attorney. On January 27, 2010, the general contractor's liability carrier sent a letter to the subcontractor giving notice of the employee's claim and requesting that the subcontractor put its carrier on notice. On February 9, 2010, the subcontractor sent to Aspen a claim form with the January 2010 letter attached. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    November 30, 2016 —
    Scope, time and cost provisions may be the most important clauses in your construction contract but they’re not the only ones which can impact your bottom line. The fourth and final part in a multi-part series, here are some other important construction contract clauses that can put a damper on your holidays.
      Provision: Warranty Provisions
    • Typical Provision: “Subcontractor warrants to Contractor that all materials and equipment furnished shall be new unless otherwise specified and that all Work performed shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, of good quality and free from defects, and in conformance with industry standards, manufacturer’s recommendations and the Contract Documents. All work not conforming to these requirements, including substitutions not properly approved, shall be considered defective. Subcontractor agrees to promptly make good any and all defects due to faulty workmanship, materials and/or equipment which may appear within the Contract Documents, and if no such period is stipulated in the Contract, then for a period of one year from the date of acceptance by the Owner. Nothing herein shall shorten or limit any applicable periods of limitations including, but not limited to, those set forth in Civil Code, Part 2, Title 2, Chapter 3.”
    • What it Means: Warranty periods are subject to the agreement of the parties. However, warranties are different than limitations periods, such as California’s 4 year statute of repose for patent defects and 10 year statute of repose for latent defects (note: a statute of repose is different than a statute of limitation. A statute of repose sets a deadline based on an event. So, for example, under the 10 year statute of repose for latent defects a claimant must bring a latent defect claim within 10 years following substantial completion even if the latent defect wasn’t discovered until 10 years and 1 month following substantial completion. A statute of limitation, in contrast, sets a deadline based on the occurrence of an injury or damage. So, for example, California has a 2 year statute of limitation for personal injuries, which sets a deadline of 2 years from the date of injury to bring a personal injury claim). Warranty periods are also different from limitations periods because most warranties require work to be corrected at no cost, and because many contracts include attorney’s fee provisions, breach of a warranty can give rise to claim for attorney’s fees as well.
    • What You Can Do: Lower-tiered parties should examine warranty provisions to see if they are reasonable, and if not reasonable, should seek to either eliminate or limit those provisions, such as by reducing the warranty period or providing different warranty periods for different components of work, etc.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at

    Paris ‘Locks of Love’ Overload Bridges, Threatening Structures

    June 11, 2014 —
    Le Pont des Arts, the landmark Paris footbridge that links the Louvre museum to the Saint Germain neighborhood, is buckling under the weight of “love locks.” The Paris mayor’s office closed the bridge last night to replace a grate after thousands of locks weighed down its structure. Its railings are crumbling, threatening pedestrians on the bridge and cruise boats that ply under it on the Seine River. The bridge was reopened today after it was checked for safety, with two fire-department boats standing by to avert any potential incident. Although the origins of the trend are unclear, it has become a tradition for lovers to attach a lock to the railing on the sides of bridges in Paris to seal their love. Each lock weighs about 54 to 90 grams. The mayor of Paris’s 6th arrondissement, where the bridge is located, says the locks on the Pont des Arts weigh as much 10 tons, or 22,000 pounds. The grate that collapsed yesterday weighed about 200 kilos and the bridge has about 50 of them. Ms. Fouquet may be contacted at; Mr. Deen may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Helene Fouquet and Mark Deen, Bloomberg