• casino resort expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania condominiums expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania multi family housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania production housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania institutional building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania mid-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania retail construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania structural steel construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania parking structure expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania hospital construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania tract home expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania townhome construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania landscaping construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania Medical building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania low-income housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania office building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania Subterranean parking expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania custom home expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania high-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania condominium expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania concrete tilt-up expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania
    New Washington Pennsylvania OSHA expert witness constructionNew Washington Pennsylvania concrete expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania construction expert testimonyNew Washington Pennsylvania expert witness concrete failureNew Washington Pennsylvania construction project management expert witnessesNew Washington Pennsylvania testifying construction expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania structural concrete expert
    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

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    As Recovery Continues, Home Improvement Stores Make Sales

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Read Carefully. The Insurance Coverage You Thought You Were Getting May Not Be The Coverage You Got

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Construction Spending Had Strongest Increase in Four Years

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    Potential Problems with Cases Involving One Owner and Multiple Contractors

    U.S. Stocks Fluctuate Near Record After Housing Data

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    XL Group Pairs with America Contractor’s Insurance Group to Improve Quality of Construction

    One World Trade Center Tallest Building in US

    Daiwa House to Invest 150 Billion Yen in U.S. Rental Housing

    New Jersey Construction Worker Sentenced for Home Repair Fraud

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Drywall Originator Hopes to Sell in Asia

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Washington State May Allow Common Negligence Claims against Construction Professionals

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California FAIR Plan Limited to Coverage Provided by Statutory Fire Insurance Policy

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

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Insurers' Motion to Knock Out Bad Faith, Negligent Misrepresentation Claims in Construction Defect Case Denied

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    Land Planners Not Held to Professional Standard of Care

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    SB800 Is Now Optional to the Homeowner?

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

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

    Court Says No to Additional Lawyer in Las Vegas Fraud Case

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Echoes of Shutdown in Delay of Key Building Metric

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Time to Reform Construction Defect Law in Nevada
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from more than 4500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the New Washington, Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to New Washington'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
    New Washington, Pennsylvania

    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 full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio
    Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    March 19, 2014 —
    Mitsubishi Estate Co. (8802), Japan’s biggest developer by market value, will rebuild a Tokyo residential complex where it stopped selling apartments that went for as much as 350 million yen ($3.4 million) after finding defects. The reconstruction will take about three to four years to complete, and builder Kajima Corp. will be in charge of the project and cover the cost, said Masayuki Watanabe, a spokesman at Tokyo-based Mitsubishi Estate. The building was constructed by Kajima along with Kandenko (1942) Co., according to the developer. Mitsubishi Estate stopped selling apartments in the building in central Tokyo’s upscale Aoyama neighborhood after finding it needed repairs, including to some of the pipes, the developer said in an e-mail on Feb. 3. Eighty-three out of 86 units were under contract and were expected to be handed over to the owners on March 20, the company said last month. Ms. Chu may be contacted at; Mr. Hyuga may be contacted at Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kathleen Chu and Takahiko Hyuga, Bloomberg

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    June 28, 2013 —
    In a long running suit regarding thousands of asbestos bodily injury claims brought against Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corporation, the California appellate court held that the excess carrier's indemnity obligation did not attach until all collectible primary policies were exhausted. Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp. v. Ins. Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, 215 Cal. App.4th 210 (Cal. Ct. App. April 8, 2013). Kaiser manufactured a variety of asbestos-containing products from 1944 through the 1970's. Truck Insurance Company provided primary insurance to Kaiser from 1964 to 1983, through four CGL policies covering 19 annual policy periods. The policy in effect from 1974 to 1981 contained a $500,000 "per occurrence" liability limit. Kaiser was insured by three other primary carriers between 1947 and 1987. ICSOP issued a first layer excess policy to Kaiser from 1974 through 1976. Kaiser tendered numerous claims for bodily injury to Truck. By October 2004, Truck's indemnity payments exceeded $50 million and included at least 39 claims that resulted in payments in excess of $500,000. For claims alleging bodily injury in 1974, Kaiser selected Truck's 1974 policy to respond to each of the claims. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at

    Plans Go High Tech

    April 25, 2012 —

    One construction executive described it as “the wave of the future.” What is it? Accessing building plans on an iPad. According to an article in MacWorld, several companies are now offering solutions to distribute and update construction plans on iPads. Changes to plans and notes can be distributed quickly through cloud computing.

    Alan Dillon, a senior superintendent at DPR Construction told MacWorld, “I can take my iPad into the field and have my whole set of drawings.” He described a set of drawings for a large construction project as “five or six inches thick.” Danielle Douthet, of Level 10 Construction said it “can help everyone be on the same page more quickly, and make sure that everybody is working off the most current set of documents.”

    And it’s not just building plans. Other firms offer building management applications designed to be taken into the field on mobile devices.

    Read the full story…

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    August 17, 2011 —

    Jim Haugey, the Chief Economist for Reed Construction Data noted that new residential construction spending fell 0.2% in June and a slightly larger drop of 0.5% in residential remodeling. While economic growth is still low, Haugey states that homebuilders have “record low inventories.” He forecasts a shrinkage of 1.5% in 2011, followed by about 20% growth in 2012.

    Read the full story…

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    August 04, 2011 —

    In the case of Continental Western Insurance Company v. Shay Construction Inc., Judge Walker Miller has granted a summary judgment against Shay Construction and their co-defendant, Milender White Construction Company.

    Shay was the framing subcontractor for Milender White on what the court described as “a major construction project in Grand County, Colorado.” Two of Shay’s subcontractors, Wood Source Inc. and Chase Lumber Company furnished materials, labor, and equipment to Shay. They subsequently sued for nonpayment and sought to enforce mechanic’s liens, naming both Shay and Milender as defendants. Milender White alleged that Shay had “breached its obligation under its subcontracts with Milender White.”

    Shay’s insurance provider, Continental Western, stated that its coverage did not include “the dispute between Shay, its subcontractors, particularly the cross claims asserted by Milender White.” Shay then sued Continental Western, alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.

    The court, however, has found with Continental Western and has granted them a summary judgment. They found “no genuine issue as to any material fact.” The judge did not side with Continental Western on their interpretation of the phrase “those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages.” The court found that the Colorado courts have not limited this to tort actions only. However, as Milender’s cross claim included claims of faulty workmanship on the part of Shay, Judge Miller found for Continental.

    Read the court’s decision…

    Stucco Contractor Trying to Limit Communication in Construction Defect Case

    November 13, 2013 —
    South Carolina State Plastering claimed in the South Carolina Court of Appeals that communication between attorneys and residents of a retirement community could undermine the judgment in the case. Residents of Sun City had filed a class action lawsuit over problems with stucco in the community. Phillip Segul, the plaintiffs’ attorney, noted that plasterer was “directly communicating with the class members and getting them to sign opt-outs and releases of their claims,” although this was something that Everett Kendall, the plasterer’s attorney denied. The lawsuit has been grinding along for six years. Some residents fear they won’t outlive the construction defect lawsuit. Read the full story...

    TOLLING AGREEMENTS: Construction Defect Lawyers use them to preserve Association Warranty Claims during Construction Defect Negotiations with Developers

    March 07, 2014 —
    If properly drafted, a tolling agreement stops, or “tolls,” the running of the statue of limitations and other time periods aplicable to an association’s legal claims while it attempts to negotiate the repair of and/or monetary compensation for construction deficiencies with the developer and other responsible parties. In short, it is a “time -out” that allows and association to preserve its legal claim so it can focus on settling its claims rather than pursing them in court. Too often, condominium associations and homeowner associations (“HOA”) unknowingly allow their legal claims for construction defects to expire during lengthy negotiations with developers and builders. If negotiations fail, the association may turn to a construction defect attorney for legal representation only to find their construction defect legal claims are time barred because the statute of limitations or other legal time period has expired. This article explains how condominium associations and HOAs can avoid this scenario by the use of tolling agreements to preserve their legal claims while engaged in potentially lengthy negotiations with developers to correct construction defects. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas D. Cowie, Maryland Condo Construction Defect Law Blog
    Mr. Cowie may be contacted at