BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction expert witness Laurel Indiana housing expert witness Laurel Indiana condominiums expert witness Laurel Indiana Medical building expert witness Laurel Indiana condominium expert witness Laurel Indiana high-rise construction expert witness Laurel Indiana townhome construction expert witness Laurel Indiana office building expert witness Laurel Indiana tract home expert witness Laurel Indiana casino resort expert witness Laurel Indiana parking structure expert witness Laurel Indiana custom home expert witness Laurel Indiana landscaping construction expert witness Laurel Indiana mid-rise construction expert witness Laurel Indiana production housing expert witness Laurel Indiana retail construction expert witness Laurel Indiana hospital construction expert witness Laurel Indiana low-income housing expert witness Laurel Indiana concrete tilt-up expert witness Laurel Indiana Subterranean parking expert witness Laurel Indiana industrial building expert witness Laurel Indiana institutional building expert witness Laurel Indiana
    Laurel Indiana concrete expert witnessLaurel Indiana forensic architectLaurel Indiana window expert witnessLaurel Indiana construction project management expert witnessLaurel Indiana testifying construction expert witnessLaurel Indiana building envelope expert witnessLaurel Indiana building consultant expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Laurel, Indiana

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Laurel Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Gtr Terre Haute
    Local # 1582
    2747 Sidenbender Rd
    Terre Haute, IN 47802

    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Southeastern Indiana chapter
    Local # 1536
    394 W County Road 400 N
    Greensburg, IN 47240
    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Madison County Chapter
    Local # 1504
    853 E. Southern Avenue
    Indianapolis, IN 46203
    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Jackson-Jennings Builders Association
    Local # 1574
    11990 W Mt Healthy Rd
    Columbus, IN 47201

    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Indianapolis
    Local # 1544
    PO Box 44670
    Indianapolis, IN 46244

    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Indiana Builders Association
    Local # 1500
    101 W Ohio St Ste 1111
    Indianapolis, IN 46204

    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Wayne County Builders Association
    Local # 1570
    PO Box 1591
    Richmond, IN 47375

    Laurel Indiana Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Laurel Indiana


    Specific Source of Water Not Relevant in Construction Defect Claim

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Case Alert Update: SDV Case Tabbed as One of New York’s Top Three Cases to Watch

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    The Vallagio HOA Appeals the Decision from the Colorado Court of Appeals

    Condo Board Goes after Insurer for Construction Defect Settlement

    Narrow House Has Wide Opposition

    Remediation Work Caused by Installation of Defective Tiles Not Covered

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    New York Bridge to Be Largest Infrastructure Project in North America

    Loss Ensuing from Faulty Workmanship Covered

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Ohio Condo Owners Sue Builder, Alleging Construction Defects

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    Port Authority Approves Subsidies for 2 World Trade Project

    Construction Employment Rose in 38 States from 2013 to 2014

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    Rescission of Policy for Misrepresentation in Application Reversed

    Texas Law Bars Coverage under Homeowner’s Policy for Mold Damage

    Seventh Circuit Confirms Additional Insured's Coverage for Alleged Construction Defects

    New York Bars Developers from Selling Condos due to CD Fraud Case

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Hawaii Construction Defect Law Increased Confusion

    TV Kitchen Remodelers Sued for Shoddy Work

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    There's No Such Thing as a Free House

    When Do You Call Your Lawyer?

    Contractor Changes Contract After Signed, Then Sues Older Woman for Breaking It

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

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    Venue for Suing Public Payment Bond

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- An Alternative

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Florida Federal Court Reinforces Principle That Precise Policy Language Is Required Before An Insurer Can Deny Coverage Based On An Exclusion

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Ohio Condo Development Case Filed in 2011 is Scheduled for Trial

    Brazil Congress Chiefs Deny Wrongdoing in Petrobras Scandal

    RDU Terminal 1: Going Green

    Proving & Defending Lost Profit Damages

    Affordable Harlem Housing Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Growing Optimism Among Home Builders

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    New Jersey Judge Found Mortgage Lender Liable When Borrower Couldn’t Pay

    Beware of Statutory Limits on Change Orders
    Corporate Profile

    LAUREL INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Laurel, Indiana Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Laurel'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
    Laurel, Indiana

    How Small Mistakes Can Have Serious Consequences Under California's Contractor Licensing Laws.

    February 15, 2018 —
    In construction, some risks have nothing to do with how well a contractor executes a project. Licensing problems is one of these risks. Even a brief lapse caused by an unintentional administrative error can give the CSLB grounds to discipline a contractor, or enable a customer to seek disgorgement and other remedies provided by Business and Professions Code section 7031. This article discusses five tips for mitigating the liabilities associated with licensing problems. Tip 1: Take workers' compensation insurance very seriously. Workers’ compensation insurance problems can trigger license suspension in California. Business and Professions Code section 7125.4 calls for automatic suspension if a contractor cannot provide proof of workers’ compensation insurance for any period of time. This is particularly serious for residential remodelers who claim exemption for workers’ compensation but are later discovered – usually during litigation with a homeowner – to have “off the books” workers helping them. Courts can declare the contractor retroactively unlicensed under these circumstances and order it to disgorge, i.e., to pay back, every penny paid by the customer for the entire project (even for materials). (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7031, subd. (b); Wright v. Issak (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1116.) The contractor will also find itself unable to collect any amounts owed to it by the customer. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7031, subd. (a).) Tip 2: Watch out for licensing confusion after a merger or acquisition. The economic downturn of 2008 and 2009 resulted in consolidation throughout the building industry. The newly merged or acquired entities often allowed redundant licenses to expire, assuming they could complete all pending projects under the umbrella of the acquiring company's license. Many learned this was a mistake the hard way. Armed with the California Supreme Court's opinion in MW Erectors, Inc. v. Niederhauser Ornamental & Metal Works Co., Inc. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 412, customers began refusing to pay invoices and demanding disgorgement under Business and Professions Code section 7031 because the original contractor did not maintain licensure “at all times.” Many of these customers succeeded. Tip 3: If a license suspension has occurred or is imminent, prepare to prove substantial compliance. Section 7031(a) and (b) give a disgruntled or indebted customer every incentive to capitalize on a contractor's licensing problems. Subdivision (e) is where a contractor must turn to protect its interests if this happens. It allows the contractor to prove “substantial compliance” with licensing requirements and avoid (a)’s and (b)’s sharp edges if it can show the following:
    (1) The contractor “had been duly licensed as a contractor in this state prior to the performance of the act or contract”;
    (2) It “acted reasonably and in good faith to maintain proper licensure”; and
    (3) It “acted promptly and in good faith to remedy the failure to comply with the licensure requirements upon learning of the failure.”
    The Court of Appeal confirmed in Judicial Council of California v. Jacobs Facilities, Inc. (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 882 that a contractor, upon request, is entitled to a hearing on these three factors before it is subjected to disgorgement under Section 7031(b). The legislature amended Section 7031 shortly after the Court of Appeal published this case. The Assembly’s floor analysis went so far as to directly quote the opinion’s observation that penalizing a construction firm for “technical transgressions only indirectly serves the Contractors Law’s larger purpose of preventing the delivery of services by unqualified contractors.” (Assem. Com. on Bus. and Prof., Off. of Assem. Floor Analyses, analysis of Sen. Holden's No. 1793 (2015-2016 Reg. Sess.) as amended August 2, 2016, p. 2.) This echoed an industry consensus that clarifying the law was needed to ensure that properly licensed and law-abiding construction firms were not “placed at fatal monetary risk by malicious lawsuits motivated by personal gain rather than consumer protection.” (Assem. Com. on Judiciary, com. on Assem. Bill No. 1793 (2015-2016 Reg. Sess.), pp. 6-7.) Unfortunately, existing law does not give many examples of what it means to act “reasonably and in good faith to maintain proper licensure” or to act “promptly and in good faith” to fix license problems. A practical approach is for a contractor to work backwards by assuming it will need to prove substantial compliance at some point in the future. Designated individuals within the organization should have clear responsibility over obtaining and renewing the proper licenses and should keep good records. If necessary, these designees can testify about the contractor's internal policies and their efforts to fix licensing problems when they arose. For example, if the suspension resulted from not providing the CSLB proof of workers’ compensation insurance, the designee can testify about the cause (a broker miscommunication, transmission error, etc.) and produce documents showing how he or she worked promptly to procure a certificate of insurance to send CSLB. Saved letters, emails, and notes from telephone calls will provide designees and their successors with an important resource months or years down the line if a dispute arises and the contractor is required to reconstruct the chronology of a licensing glitch and prove its due diligence. Tip 4: Don't sign new contracts unless all necessary licenses are active and any problems are resolved. A recently-formed contractor should not begin soliciting and signing contracts until all required licenses are confirmed as “active.” The first requirement of substantial compliance – being “duly licensed as a contractor in this state prior to the performance of the act or contract” – cannot be met by a contractor that first obtains its license mid-project. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7031, subd. (e)(1); Alatriste v. Cesar’s Exterior Designs (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 656.) A licensed contractor should also consider refraining from signing new contracts if there is any reason to believe its license might be suspended in the near future – especially if the suspension will be retroactive. Having a suspension on record at the time of contracting may complicate the question of whether the contractor was “duly licensed . . . prior to performance” for the purposes of substantial compliance. Tip 5: Any judgment against a contractor can cause license suspension if not handled promptly and correctly. The Business and Professions Code authorizes the CSLB to suspend the license of a contractor that does not pay a construction related court judgment within 90 days. The term “construction related” is interpreted to include nearly all types of disputes involving a contractor. (16 Cal. Code Reg. 868; Pacific Caisson & Shoring, Inc. v. Bernards Bros. Inc. (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1246, 1254-1255.) This means a contractor should treat a judgment against it for unpaid office rent, for example, as one carrying the same consequences as one arising from a construction defect or subcontractor claim. The contractor should also not assume that filing an appeal, or agreeing with the other side to stay enforcement, automatically excuses the 90-day deadline in the eyes of the CSLB. It does not. A contractor must notify the CSLB in writing before this period expires, then post bond for the amount of judgment, if it wishes to delay payment for any reason. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7071.17, subd. (d).) A suspension may result if it does not. This applies even to small claims judgments. Recent case law and the 2016 amendments to Business and Professions Code section 7031 provide some solace to those caught in the dragnet of California's licensing laws. But avoiding these problems altogether is preferable. Consider licensing the foundation of a successful business and deserving of the same attention as the structures a contractor builds. Eric R. Reed is a business and insurance litigator in the Ventura office of Myers, Widders, Gibson, Jones & Feingold, LLP. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric Reed, Myers, Widders, Gibson, Jones & Feingold, LLP
    Mr. Reed may be contacted at ereed@mwgjlaw.com

    Hiring Subcontractors with Workers Compensation Insurance

    January 10, 2018 —
    You want to hear more on the POWER of statutory workers compensation immunity? Well, here it is, because as I have mentioned in the past, workers compensation immunity is powerful reinforcing the importance for contractors to ensure the subcontractors they hire absolutely have workers compensation insurance. Likewise, subcontractors want to ensure the subcontractors they hire also have workers compensation insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    West Coast Casualty’s Quarter Century of Service

    May 03, 2018 —
    West Coast Casualty's Construction Defect Seminar has been promoting charitable work for the past twenty-five years. Each year, they promote different charities, and provide multiple ways for individuals and companies to contribute. Whether it’s Buy a Banner, Tennis Shoe Thursday, or Flip Flop Friday, industry members are given opportunities to support worthwhile causes. This year, West Coast Casualty is supporting Hawaii’s Children’s Cancer Foundation , St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and Shriners Hospital for Children. WCC also supports charitable organizations through every award that they present each year. Donations are made in the winner’s name: For Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence awardees, Habitat for Humanity as well as a local California and Nevada charity; For Legend of an Era Award, the designated charity of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar; and for The Larry Syhre Commitment to Service Award, a donation to The Larry Syhre Foundation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Finding Plaintiff Intentionally Spoliated Evidence, the Northern District of Indiana Imposes Sanction

    March 14, 2018 —
    On January 23, 2018, the Northern District of Indiana issued a decision that clarifies what constitutes spoliation of evidence under Indiana law. In Arcelormittal Ind. Harbor LLC v. Amex Nooter, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10141 (N.D. Ind.), the defendant filed a motion for sanctions, alleging that the plaintiff intentionally spoliated critical evidence. The defendant sought dismissal of the action, asserting that the plaintiff intentionally discarded and lost important physical evidence within hours of a fire that occurred while the defendant’s employees were performing work at its facility. The decision underscores the importance of taking immediate action to properly identify and secure potentially material evidence in order to satisfy ones duty to preserve pre-suit evidence and avoid any spoliation defenses and associated sanctions. In Arcelormittal, the court initially considered whether to apply state or federal law when analyzing a litigant’s duty to preserve pre-suit evidence and determine if that party committed spoliation. Since the case was brought in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, the court held that Indiana state law governed the spoliation analysis. As noted by the court, under Indiana state law, “the intentional destruction, mutilation, altercation, or concealment of evidence” is considered to be spoliation. Thus, under Indiana law, a party who knew or should have known that litigation was imminent “may not lose, destroy or suppress material facts or evidence.” The plaintiff argued that Indiana law requires a showing of improper purpose or bad faith to establish that a litigant spoliated evidence. The Arcelormittal court rejected the plaintiff’s argument. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    Visual Construction Diaries – Interview with Jeff Sassinsky of Fovea Aero

    November 30, 2017 —
    Jeff Sassinsky, President of Fovea Aero, gave me a live demonstration on Fovea Aero Vision – an app that allows you to a get a fully immersive visual construction diary of your project. The idea for the development of Fovea Aero Vision came from discussions with general contractors, owners, and other construction industry professionals. They were talking about the use of smartphones, particularly phone cameras, in construction. The photos, for example, of a fitting that does not look right end up in a folder on a server or goes back and forth in email messages. “The lack of any structure behind both the collection and the storage and sharing of the photos is hampering their usage,” Jeff said. “We wanted to solve the problem by creating a full record of everything that takes place on a construction site, on a regular basis, sharing it among the stakeholders, and making it super easy to use.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on February 16, 2017 Builders started work on more U.S. homes than forecast in January after an upward revision to starts in the prior month, a sign construction was on a steady path entering 2017. Residential starts totaled an annualized 1.25 million, easing from a 1.28 million pace in the prior month, a Commerce Department report showed Thursday. The median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg was 1.23 million. Permits, a proxy for future construction, increased at the fastest pace since November 2015 on a pickup in applications for apartment building. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sho Chandra, Bloomberg

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    December 20, 2017 —
    The Florida Supreme Court issued its opinion in Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., Case No., SC16-1420, which answered the following certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit: Is the notice and repair process set forth in Chapter 558 of the Florida Statutes a “suit'” within the meaning of the CGL policies issued by C&F to ACI? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Chiocca, Cole Scott & Kissane P.A.
    Mr. Chiocca may be contacted at john.chiocca@csklegal.com

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    May 03, 2018 —
    If you don’t want to venture far from the Disneyland Resort, consider heading to the Outlets at Orange. Formerly known as the Block of Orange, this open air shopping center features outlet stores such as Neiman Marcus Last Call, Nordstrom Rack, and Sax Fifth Avenue’s Off Fifth, as well as an AMC movie theater, restaurants, Lucky Strike Bowling Alley, and Dave and Buster’s. For another local option, head to the Brea Mall, where you can find department stores such as Macy’s and Nordstrom’s and a host of other stores like Apple, Guess, and Tommy Bahama. For a more exclusive shopping experience, travel to south Orange County's Fashion Island of Newport Beach. Their department stores include Bloomingdale’s, Macy’s, Neiman Marcus’s, and Nordstroms, and the shopping center also contains many boutique shops and eateries. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of