• low-income housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania custom homes 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 concrete tilt-up expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania townhome construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania production housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania multi family housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania institutional building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania condominiums expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania Subterranean parking expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania retail construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania custom home expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania structural steel construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania Medical building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania high-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania casino resort expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania housing expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania industrial building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania mid-rise construction expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania office building expert witness New Washington Pennsylvania
    New Washington Pennsylvania expert witness commercial buildingsNew Washington Pennsylvania window expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania construction expert witness consultantNew Washington Pennsylvania contractor expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania structural engineering expert witnessesNew Washington Pennsylvania construction project management expert witnessNew Washington Pennsylvania civil engineering expert witness
    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

    A Performance-Based Energy Code in Seattle: Will It Save Existing Buildings?

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    The Ever-Growing Thicket Of California Civil Code Section 2782

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    Fannie-Freddie Elimination Model in Apartments: Mortgages

    Brooklyn’s Hipster Economy Challenges Manhattan Supremacy

    Texas School System Goes to Court over Construction Defect

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    Homebuilding Continues to Recover in San Antonio Area

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

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

    Construction Firm Sues Town over Claims of Building Code Violations

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

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    Homeowners Sue Over Sinkholes, Use Cash for Other Things

    Structural Defects in Thousands of Bridges in America

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    Homebuilder Confidence Takes a Beating

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Google’s Floating Mystery Boxes Solved?

    Builders Seek to Modify Scaffold Law

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    Another Guilty Plea In Nevada Construction Defect Fraud Case

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

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

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    Design and Construction Defects Not a Breach of Contract

    Seven Coats Rose Attorneys Named to Texas Rising Stars List

    Iowa Apartment Complex Owners Awarded Millions for Building Defects

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    Are Construction Defect Claims Covered Under CGL Policies?

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

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

    Construction Defects through the Years

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    Transition Study a Condo Board’s First Defense against Construction Defects

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    Civility Is Key in Construction Defect Mediation
    Corporate Profile


    The New Washington, Pennsylvania Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    New Washington, Pennsylvania

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    March 28, 2012 —

    Writing in Construction Law Colorado, Brady Iandiorio revisits the case Continental Western v. Shay Construction. He promises to continue to follow cases dealing with Colorado HB 10-1394.

    Recently the Court ruled on two Motions to Reconsider filed by Defendants Milender White and Shay Construction.

    Procedurally, the Motions to Reconsider were ruled on by the Honorable William J. Martinez, because the day after the motions were filed the action was reassigned to Judge Martinez. In the short analysis of the Motion to Reconsider, the court leaned on Judge Walker D. Miller’s ruling on the summary judgment and his analysis of the (j)(5) and (j)(6) exclusions.

    As a quick refresher regarding the grant of summary judgment, Judge Miller agreed with Continental Western’s argument that the asserted claims were excluded under the “damage to property” exclusion. The policy’s exclusions state: “(j) Damage to Property . . . (5) that particular part of real property on which you or any contractors or subcontractors working directly or indirectly on your behalf are performing operations, if the ‘property damage’ arises out of those operations; or (6) that particular part of any property that must be restored, repaired or replaced because ‘your work’ was incorrectly performed on it.” Judge Miller found that both exclusions (j)(5) and (6) applied to both Shay’s allegedly defective work.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Brady Iandiorio of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Iandiorio can be contacted at

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    December 30, 2013 —
    A couple in Mercer County, West Virginia have claimed that the renovations done to their home not only failed to meet the requested ADA standards, but lead to construction defects, as reported by The West Virginia Record. Ray and Sherry Price are suing Lamberts Construction Company of Bluefield, West Virginia, claiming breach of contract and infliction of emotional distress. The couple hired to company to construct a bathroom addition, a bedroom addition, and a new driveway. In addition to other damages, they are also seeking the cost to repair the renovations. Read the full story...

    Feds Used Wire to Crack Las Vegas HOA Scam

    July 31, 2013 —
    Court documents have revealed that the FBI used informants wearing listening devices in order to uncover the plan to take over Las Vegas area homeowner associations with the intent of bilking the residents through backdoor agreements on construction defect claims. The Las Vegas Review-Journal notes one important step was when the FBI managed to get a member of the Mission Pointe board to act as an informant. The FBI informant was recruited by one of the conspirators, Sami Robert Hindiyeh. The informant eventually spoke with Benzer himself. The plan was to convince the community manager of Mission Pointe to take bribes, all part of rigging the board election. At one point, the informant was paid $20,000 for his help in convincing the manager to take part. The manager had agreed to play along in the FBI sting. Ralph Priola, one of the conspirators, told the informant that “as long as we keep everything on the up and up, that’s the way our company operates.” Later Priola asked the informant if legitimate ballots could be swapped out for those voting for Benzer’s candidates. But the election didn’t happen. The FBI raided Benzer’s office, bringing the scam to its end. Read the full story...

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    December 09, 2011 —

    Water intrusion caused by a construction defect was not covered under the all risk policy’s ensuing loss provision. See Friedberg v. Chubb & Son, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123582 (D. Minn. Oct. 25, 2011).

    Extensive water damage was discovered in the insureds’ home when a small hole in the exterior wall was being repaired. Chubb’s adjuster and an expert found water intrusion causing rot, mold, and damage to the home’s wood framing and insulation. Chubb denied coverage because water intruded through the roof and wall, resulting in gradual deterioration. The insureds filed suit.

    The policy excluded coverage for construction defects, but insured "ensuing covered loss unless another exclusion applies."

    The court agreed there was a prima facie case for coverage because the home suffered a physical loss.

    Read the full story…

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

    Six Inducted into California Homebuilding Hall of Fame

    February 04, 2013 —
    The California Homebuilding Foundation has inducted six industry leaders into their Homebuilding Hall of Fame, in recognition of both their professional accomplishments and their philanthropic and volunteer activities. The six homebuilders to be honored are Sherman S. Haggerty of Lennar Corp., Joe Head of the SummerHill Land Division of SummerHill Homes, Robert B. MacLeod of Newland Real Estate Group, John J. Ryan Jr. of Brookfield Homes Bay Area, Tom Sudberry of Sudberry Properties, and Bill Watt of Baywood Development Group. Read the full story...

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    July 31, 2013 —
    One of the bright spots in the Colorado construction industry over the last few years has been the construction of for-rent apartments. It seems as though apartments are going up everywhere you look along the Front Range. As market forces change, it will be interesting to see whether these units will remain apartments or whether they will be converted into for-sale condominiums or townhouses. One of the risk management strategies we have recently discussed with our general contractor clients who have been asked to build apartments is to ensure that the project remains a for-rent apartment project through the applicable statute of repose, conservatively assumed to be eight years. Unfortunately this is not always feasible, usually because the owner and/or lender are not interested in encumbering the property for such a long period of time, and want to retain the ability to convert the project if and when market forces allow, even if that is before the running of the statute of repose. The purpose of this article is to discuss the insurance and risk management ramifications of converting a project too early. I have recently heard from several sources in the insurance industry that there are owners and contractors who are currently building apartments with the idea that they will be held as apartments for two to three years and then converted to for-sale condominiums or townhomes. While this strategy may have great appeal from a business point of view, it has a very serious risk management downside. Apparently, these owners and contractors are operating under the mistaken belief that they will have no liability exposure to the ultimate purchasers of the converted units or to the homeowners association for construction defects. This is an incorrect belief. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain
    David M. McLain can be contacted at

    Home Numbers Remain Small While Homes Get Bigger

    June 28, 2013 —
    Catherine Rampell reports in the New York Times that while the number of single-family homes built in 2012 was still at the very bottom of the range, since the government starting recording this data in 1973, the medium size for these homes is at its largest ever. According to data collected by the Census Bureau, these homes also have more bedrooms and bathrooms than previously. Of all homes built in 2012, forty-one percent had four or more bedrooms and thirty percent had three or more bathrooms. Both of these were the highest percentages in those categories. Meanwhile, the size of newly-built rental units declined in 2012. While still larger than the average rental unit built in 1999 (the earliest date given in the article), there has been little change over the last decade. During the same period, the size of sale units in multi-family buildings did show an increase. Read the full story...

    Boilerplate Contract Language on Permits could cause Problems for Contractors

    March 19, 2014 —
    Craig Martin on his blog Construction Contractor Advisor discusses the potential problems for a contractor that a “boilerplate contract” could cause: “A recent case revealed the problems a contractor had with permits when the contractor’s estimate contemplated an easy permitting process and compliance, but in actuality it was much, much more difficult.” Martin cites the case Bell/Heery v. United States, where a contractor discovered that the permit process would be much more time-consuming and expensive than originally planned. When Bell/Heery asked for additional funds to cover the additional costs, the “contracting officer rejected the request, finding that Bell/Heery had assumed the risk of the permitting process and it was liable for any costs associated with the permitting process and construction methods required by the permitting process.” “Bell/Heery appealed to the Court of Claims,” but lost the battle. The contractor had to absorb $7 million in costs to comply with the required permits. Read the full story...