• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia civil engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witness windowsAshburn Virginia construction forensic expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction defect expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction safety expertAshburn Virginia building envelope expert witnessAshburn Virginia structural engineering 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

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Home Sales Going to Investors in Daytona Beach Area

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    Solar Energy Isn’t Always Green

    CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Related Remedies – 2014 Update

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Expert's Opinions On Causation Leads Way To Summary Judgment For Insurer

    Surety Bond Now a Valid Performance Guarantee for NC Developers (guest post)

    Recent Changes in the Law Affecting Construction Defect Litigation

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process


    Nevada Judge says Class Analysis Not Needed in Construction Defect Case

    Discovery Requests in Bad Faith Litigation Considered by Court

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Fire Damages Unfinished Hospital Tower at NYU Langone Medical Center

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    New Jersey Construction Company Owner and Employees Arrested for Fraud

    Homebuilders See Record Bearish Bets on Shaky Recovery

    Illinois Town Sues over Construction Defects at Police Station

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    These Are the 13 Cities Where Millennials Can't Afford a Home

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Coverage for Construction Defect Barred by Contractual-Liability Exclusion

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    Appeals Court Explains Punitive Damages Awards For Extreme Reprehensibility Or Unusually Small, Hard-To-Detect Or Hard-To-Measure Compensatory Damages

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    Ohio Does Not Permit Retroactive Application of Statute of Repose

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    Design Professional Needs a License to be Sued for Professional Negligence

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    School’s Lawsuit over Defective Field Construction Delayed

    Gloria Gaynor Sues Contractor over Defective Deck Construction

    California Case Adds Difficulties for Contractors & Material Suppliers

    Mediation Confidentiality Bars Malpractice Claim but for How Long?

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even
    Corporate Profile


    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

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney

    October 02, 2015 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the “life-threatening health and custody status of disbarred Las Vegas attorney Barry Levinson remained uncertain Thursday after a judge refused to reconsider his harsh prison sentence.” Levinson had been convicted of defrauding homeowners associations. Brent Bryson, Levinson’s attorney, claims that the stress of custody issues has caused health problems for his client, reported the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Bryan stated that “Levinson had heart failure while in federal custody and needs either a special heart valve operation in Southern California or a heart transplant to survive.” District Judge Michael Villani suggested that Bryson should file a civil suit for the matter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    September 17, 2014 —
    Tropical Storm Polo, the 16th storm of an unusually active eastern Pacific hurricane season, is on a path eerily like that of Odile, which blasted the Baja California peninsula earlier this week. Odile went ashore late Sept. 14 with top winds of 125 miles (201 kilometers) per hour, the strongest storm to hit the region since 1967. As its winds swept the resort city of Cabo San Lucas, it was a Category 3 storm on the five-step Saffir-Simpson scale and a major hurricane. At its peak, hours before landfall, Odile’s winds reached 135 mph, Category 4-force. Photos from Mexico’s Baja California Sur show houses destroyed, hotels piled with debris and gaping holes in the local airport. At least 30,000 tourists were stranded. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian K. Sullivan, Bloomberg
    Mr. Sullivan may be contacted at

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    April 13, 2017 —
    The consortium building the $3.2-billion Champlain Bridge in Montreal has sued Canada’s government for $93 million, claiming transportation officials gave it late notice of stricter load limits that could add to delay and make it liable for tens of millions of dollars in penalties, according to Canadian press reports and a stock analyst’s comments. A spokeswoman for the team’s lead firm, engineer-contractor SNC-Lavalin, confirms the March 28 filing in Quebec Superior Court but declined further comment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    July 14, 2016 —
    Paradoxically, Virtual Reality (VR) technologies are still lagging behind the visions that people have for their use. However, VR has already demonstrated its capacity to change the ways we design, make decisions about, and produce built environments. Is VR finally feasible? Two AEC Hackathons and meetings with certain startups have made me think that Virtual Reality (VR) might finally break through in construction. There are two reasons for my belief. Firstly, 3D and building information modeling (BIM) are widely adopted in the industry. The idea of virtual buildings and environments is nothing new and has become very natural. Secondly, there’s a growing interest in Gaming and Entertainment VR investments. This will push the technology forward and make it affordable to consumers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at

    Georgia Supreme Court Determines Damage to "Other Property" Not Necessary for Finding Occurrence

    July 31, 2013 —
    The Georgia Supreme Court has determined that an "occurrence" may arise under a CGL policy even if "other property" is not damaged. Taylor Morrison Servs. v. HDI-Gerling Am. Ins. Co., 2013 Ga. LEXIS 618 (Ga. July 12, 2013). Taylor Morrison, the insured, was a homebuilder. It was sued in a class action by more than 400 homeowners in California alleging that the concrete foundations of their homes were improperly constructed. This led to water intrusion, cracks in the floors and driveways, and warped and buckled flooring. At first, HDI-Gerling defended under a reservation of rights. Subsequently, however, HDI-Gerling sued Taylor Morrison in federal district court in Georgia, seeking a declaratory judgment that there was no coverage. The district court granted summary judgment to HDI-Gerling after determining that there was no "occurrence" when the only "property damage" alleged was damage to work of the insured. Georgia law was applied to the dispute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    May 20, 2015 —
    In a dispute between the excess and primary carriers, the Fifth Circuit determined the primary policy was exhausted, triggering coverage under the excess policy. Amerisure Mut. Ins. Co. v. Arch Spec. Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6627 (5th Cir. April 21, 2015). Amerisure issued a CGL policy to Admiral Glass & Mirror Co. The policy provided excess over any coverage under a controlled insurance program policy. Arch issued an Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP) policy to Endeavor Highrise, LP and to its contrators and subcontractors for bodily injury and property damage arising out of the construction of the Endeavor Highrise. Admiral was a subcontractor insured under the OCIP. The OCIP had combined bodily injury and property damage limits of $2,000,000 per occurrence, a general aggregate limit of $2,000,000 and a products-completed operations aggregate limit of $2,000,000. The OCIP contained a Supplementary Payments provision which provided that Arch would pay "[a]ll expenses we incur" in connection with any covered claim, and that "[t]hese payments will not reduce the limits of insurance." Endorsement 16, however, expressly deleted and replaced this statement with: "[supplementary payments] will reduce the limits of insurance." The OCIP also provided that Arch's duty to defend ended "when we have used up the applicable limit of insurance in the payment of judgments or settlements." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    May 19, 2011 —

    The importance of careful preparation and documentation was the take away lesson in a Texas bad faith case, C.K. Lee v. Catlin Specialty Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19145 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 28, 2011).

    C.K. Lee owned a commercial shopping center in Houston. Catlin issued a commercial property policy to Lee. On September 12, 2008, Hurricane Ike hit and caused substantial property damage throughout the Texas Gulf Coast area. On September 24, 2008, Lee submitted a claim for damage to the roof of his shopping center to Catlin.

    Catlin hired Engle Martin to represent its interests in adjusting the claim. Engle Martin eventually adjusted over 200 Ike-related claims for Catlin.

    In November 2008, Engle Martin and Emergency Services Inc., retained by Lee, inspected Lee’s property. Engle Martin observed evidence of roof repairs that had apparently been made both before and after Hurricane Ike. Engle Martin decided it was necessary to use an infrared scan of the roof to help identify which damages, if any, were attributable to wind and which, if any, were attributable to sub par, prior repairs or natural deterioration.

    Engle Martin retained Project, Time & Cost (PT&C) to conduct the infrared inspection. PT&C’s inspection determined there was no wind-related damage to the roof and no breaches or openings created by wind. Instead, the roof had exceeded its life expectancy and was in need of replacement due to normal wear and weathering. Consequently, Catlin decided that the damage to Lee’s roof was not caused by winds from Hurricane Ike.

    Meanwhile, Lee’s contractor, Emergency Services, prepared a report estimating that the total cost of repairing the roof would be $871,187. Engle Martin’s estimate for repair of the roof was $22,864.

    Lee filed suit for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of the Texas Insurance Code. Catlin moved for summary judgment on all claims but breach of contract, arguing that because there was a bona fide dispute concerning the cause of the damages and whether they were covered under the policy, there was no evidence of bad faith or violations of the Texas Insurance Code.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at

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

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    October 21, 2015 —
    In responding to a certified question from the U.S. Distric Court, the Hawaii Supreme Court determined that an excess carrier can sue the primary carrier for failure to settle a claim in bad faith within primary limits. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2015 Haw. LEXIS 142 (Haw. June 29, 2015). St. Paul, the excess carrier, and Liberty Mutual, the primary carrier, issued polices to Pleasant Travel Service, Inc. The primary policy covered up to $1 million. Pleasant Travel was sued for damages resulting from an accidental death. St. Paul alleged that Liberty Mutual rejected multiple pretrial settlement offers within the $1 million primary policy limit. A trial resulted in a verdict of $4.1 million against Pleasant Travel. The action settled for a confidential amount in excess of the Liberty Mutual policy limit. St. Paul paid the amount in excess. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at