BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia office building expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia consulting engineersAshburn Virginia soil failure expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction safety expertAshburn Virginia building envelope expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction expert testimonyAshburn Virginia expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Sales of New U.S. Homes Surged in August to Six-Year High

    Look Out! Texas Building Shedding Marble Panels

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports CDCCF Charity at 2014 WCC Seminar

    New York’s Highest Court Reverses Lower Court Ruling That Imposed Erroneous Timeliness Requirement For Disclaimers of Coverage

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    Premises Liability: Everything You Need to Know

    Surety's Settlement Without Principal's Consent Is Not Bad Faith

    Court Holds That Public Entity Can Unilaterally Replace Subcontractor Under California’s Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    The Cheapest Place to Buy a House in the Hamptons

    Carbon Monoxide Injuries Caused by One Occurrence

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    KB to Spend $43.2 Million on Florida Construction Defects

    Are Housing Prices Poised to Fall in Denver?

    Effects of Amendment to Florida's Statute of Repose on the Products Completed Operations Hazard

    Sixth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Under Kentucky Law

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    Time to Reform Construction Defect Law in Nevada

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation: A Redux

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    Colorado House Bill 1279 Stalls over 120-day Unit Owner Election Period

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    North Dakota Court Determines Inadvertent Faulty Workmanship is an "Occurrence"

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Six Reasons to Use Regular UAV Surveys on Every Construction Project

    Administrative and Environmental Law Cases Decided During the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 Term

    In Texas, a General Contractor May be Liable in Tort to a Third-Party Lessee for Property Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Work

    July Sees Big Drop in Home Sales

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Alert: Insurer Delay Extends Time to Repair or Replace Damaged Property

    U.S. Department of Justice Settles against Days Inn

    No Bond, No Recovery: WA Contractors Must Comply With WA Statutory Requirements Or Risk Being Barred From Recovery If Their Client Refuses To Pay

    $109-Million Renovation Begins on LA's Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station

    The Construction Industry's Health Kick

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    Design Professional Asserting Copyright Infringement And Contributory Copyright Infringement

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    How A Contractor Saved The Day On A Troubled Florida Condo Project

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Medical Center Builder Sues Contracting Agent, Citing Costly Delays

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part
    Corporate Profile

    ASHBURN VIRGINIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Ashburn, Virginia 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 more than 25 years 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
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    December 09, 2019 —
    On August 13, 2019, in a case that may have an impact on the leasing of federal lands for energy development in the future, the U.S. District Court for the Missoula, Montana Division, issued a ruling in the case of Western Organization of Resource Councils v. Bernhardt, which involves the application of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to the Department of the Interior’s Royalty Policy Committee. This advisory committee, initially established in 1995 to provide advice to the Secretary on issues related to the leasing of federal and Indian lands for energy and mineral resources production, is subject to the provisions of FACA, codified at 5 U.S.C. app. Sections 1-16. The plaintiffs challenged the operations of this advisory committee, which was reestablished for two years beginning in 2017, because it allegedly “acts in secret and works to advance the goals of only one interest: the extractive industries that profit from the development of public gas, oil, and coal.” More specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that this advisory committee violated FACA because: (a) it was not properly established as provided in the implementing GSA rules (which are located at 41 CFR Section 102-3); (b) did not provide public notice of its meetings and publicly disseminate its materials; (c) ensure that its membership was fairly balanced; and (d) failed to exercise independent judgment without inappropriate influences from special interests. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    November 24, 2019 —
    As a native of Turin Italy, I was horrified at the Ponte Morandi bridge collapse last year. As a child and as an adult I have travelled over that bridge more times than I can imagine and have often pondered the what-if scenarios. What if it had happened when I or my loved ones were travelling on that bridge? As a chartered construction professional, I ask myself, what could have been done, what should have been done and what can we do to prevent this from happening in the future? Having access to a digital twin with an integrated understanding of the way the bridge was designed, built and performed over the last 50 years and being able to run “what if” scenarios would have allowed us to have a much greater understanding of the structure and its limitations in its context. This is where I believe a digital twin of any built asset is a step in the right direction. The digital twin has been proclaimed by many as a milestone innovation in the construction industry, with huge benefits to constructors and owners of assets through efficiencies in manufacturing and operation but also to attracting users of the spaces they replicate. However, digital replicas can take a broad range of forms depending on its purpose, use and application sparking debates among professionals on what they actually are and what represents a ‘true’ twin. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cristina Savian, AEC Business

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    October 21, 2019 —
    I talk about payment bonds often here at Construction Law Musings. I talk a bit less about performance bonds and even less about the General Indemnity Agreements (GIA) that are signed by companies and their principals as part of the agreement between a construction company and its bonding company for the provision of these bonds. However, this does not mean that these GIA’s are not important. In fact, these are the agreements that allow a bonding provider to recoup any money paid out pursuant to either a payment or performance bond. A 2018 case illustrates their importance. In Allegheny Cas. Co. v. River City Roofing, LLC, the Court considered a claim by Allegheny seeking both specific performance of the collateral agreement and reimbursement of certain expenses and investigative costs expended by Allegheny pursuant to its performance bond. Allegheny sought to be reimbursed for certain payments for siding work, investigative costs, and costs spent enforcing the GIA. Allegheny further sought to force the defendants to post sufficient collateral. To do so, Allegheny sued in the Eastern District of Virginia and then moved for summary judgment stating that the GAI uneuivocally required such a result due to the good faith payment for the siding work and the plain language of the GIA. In response, the Defendants, River City Roofing and its principals that had personally guaranteed the indemnity, argued that the GIA did not apply to the siding work because only the roofing contract was subject to the performance bond and that any bond claims for which collateral was demanded were inchoate and therefore not proper for specific performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Hyundai to Pay 47M to Settle Construction Equipment's Alleged Clean Air Violations

    November 04, 2019 —
    Hyundai Construction Equipment Americas Inc. and its parent company are paying a $47-million civil penalty to settle federal allegations that the company sold construction vehicles that weren't certified to meet the appropriate Clean Air Act emissions standards, federal agencies say. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Philadelphia Enacts Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) Program

    October 21, 2019 —
    On August 14, 2019, Mayor Jim Kenney signed a bill authorizing, through C-PACE loans, the financing of clean energy, alternative energy and water conservation projects for eligible commercial properties in Philadelphia. Philadelphia City Council unanimously voted to approve the C-PACE program on June 20, 2019. The program will be administered by the Philadelphia Energy Authority. Third-party capital providers (not the Philadelphia Energy Authority) will originate C-PACE financings for qualified projects. C-PACE “assessments” will encumber the applicable property in a first lien position akin to a real estate tax. Documentation among the property owner, the City of Philadelphia, and the third party capital provider (identified in the ordinance as the “financial institution”) will provide, among other things, that the assessments will be payable and fully amortize over the term of the financing (i.e., 30 years) and will not be accelerated during its term. Importantly, before a C-PACE financing can be originated and the underlying property assessed, notice of the property owner’s desire to secure C-PACE financing under the program must be provided to the holder of a mortgage on the subject property and the holder of the mortgage must provide the property owner and the City of Philadelphia with its written consent. Without the mortgage lender’s consent, the C-PACE financing cannot be consummated. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy Davis, White and Williams LLP and William Johnston, White and Williams LLP Mr. Davis may be contacted at davist@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Johnston may be contacted at johnstonw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arbitration and Mediation: What’s the Difference? What to Expect.

    September 09, 2019 —
    Mediation Mediation is a process in which a neutral person or persons facilitate communication between the disputants to assist them in reaching a mutually acceptable settlement agreement. During this process, a neutral third party, with no decision-making power, intervenes in the dispute to help the litigants voluntarily reach their own agreement. Through a series of discussions, statements and private caucuses between the parties and the mediator, the process lets both parties negotiate and agree to a resolution with which everyone can abide. It is an excellent method of bringing a dispute to a conclusion without the further uncertainty and expense of litigation. Arbitration Arbitration, in addition to mediation, is one of the most common methods of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”), whereby the parties bring a dispute before a disinterested third party who is typically selected by both parties. An arbitrator hears evidence presented by the parties, makes legal rulings, determines facts and makes an arbitration award. Arbitration awards may be entered as judgments in accordance with the agreement of the parties or, where there is no agreement, in accordance with California statutes. Arbitrations can be binding or non-binding, as agreed by the parties in writing. In most cases, the arbitrator’s decision is binding and final. When is it Appropriate to Engage in Mediation and/or Arbitration? Mediation can be held at any time, before or during a lawsuit. It is a voluntary process, where both sides simply agree to go to mediation in an effort to get the case settled. Sometimes, it is a contractually required process for the parties to complete prior to going to litigation or arbitration. Typically, in this situation, if a party ignores this requirement and fails to participate in a contractually mandated mediation, they will lose their rights to recover attorneys’ fees and costs – even if they ultimately prevail. Other times, mediation is strongly encouraged by the judge if a lawsuit has already been filed, and some would even say, ordered by the court (though it is typically not called “mediation” but something very similar like a “Dispute Resolution Conference” or “Mandatory Settlement Conference”). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brittany Rupley Haefele, Porter Law Group
    Ms. Haefele may be contacted at bhaefele@porterlaw.com

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    November 24, 2019 —
    I am truly grateful that my buddy Craig Martin (@craigmartin_jd) continues his great posts over at The Construction Contractor Advisor blog. He is always a good cure for writer’s block and once again this week he gave me some inspiration. In his most recent post, Craig discusses a recent Indiana case relating to the ever present issue of termination by a subcontractor for non-payment. In the Indiana case, the court looked at the payment terms and determined that the subcontractor was justified in walking from the project when it was not paid after 60 days per the contract. This result was the correct, if surprising. Why do I say surprising? Because I am always reluctant to recommend that a subcontractor walk from a job for non payment if it is possible to continue. This is not so much for legal reasons (not paying a sub is a clear breach of contract by a general contractor) but practical ones. The practical effect of walking from the job is that the subcontractor is put on the defensive. Instead of arguing later that it performed but was not paid, that subcontractor is put in the position of arguing that the general contractor cannot collect its completion related and other damages because it breached first. This is a more intuitively difficult argument and one that is not as strong as the first. Of course, all of this is contingent on the language in your contract (is there a “pay if paid” or language like that in the Indiana case?). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Serves as Chair of the ABA Minority Trial Lawyer Committee’s Programming Subcommittee

    January 13, 2020 —
    Syed Ahmad, a partner in Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Coverage practice, has volunteered to serve as Chair of the ABA Minority Trial Lawyer Committee’s Programming Subcommittee. The Minority Trial Lawyer Committee (MTL) serves as a resource for minority litigators, in-house counsel and law students, aiming to foster professional development, legal scholarship, advocacy and community involvement. As Chair of the Programming Subcommittee, Syed, who was named to Benchmark Litigation’s 40 & Under Hot List earlier this year, will help advance MTL’s mission of facilitating discussions about diversity and the law and providing career network opportunities for minority trial lawyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle M. Spatz, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com