BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida custom homes expert witness Coconut Creek Florida high-rise construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida Medical building expert witness Coconut Creek Florida retail construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida production housing expert witness Coconut Creek Florida condominiums expert witness Coconut Creek Florida casino resort expert witness Coconut Creek Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Coconut Creek Florida townhome construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida low-income housing expert witness Coconut Creek Florida housing expert witness Coconut Creek Florida condominium expert witness Coconut Creek Florida industrial building expert witness Coconut Creek Florida tract home expert witness Coconut Creek Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Coconut Creek Florida landscaping construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida multi family housing expert witness Coconut Creek Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida institutional building expert witness Coconut Creek Florida structural steel construction expert witness Coconut Creek Florida parking structure expert witness Coconut Creek Florida
    Coconut Creek Florida engineering expert witnessCoconut Creek Florida reconstruction expert witnessCoconut Creek Florida construction expert witnessesCoconut Creek Florida construction expert witnessCoconut Creek Florida expert witness structural engineerCoconut Creek Florida consulting general contractorCoconut Creek Florida eifs expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Coconut Creek, Florida

    Florida Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: In Title XXXIII Chapter 558, the Florida Legislature establishes a requirement that homeowners who allege construction defects must first notify the construction professional responsible for the defect and allow them an opportunity to repair the defect before the homeowner canbring suit against the construction professional. The statute, which allows homeowners and associations to file claims against certain types of contractors and others, defines the type of defects that fall under the authority of the legislation and the types of housing covered in thelegislation. Florida sets strict procedures that homeowners must follow in notifying construction professionals of alleged defects. The law also establishes strict timeframes for builders to respond to homeowner claims. Once a builder has inspected the unit, the law allows the builder to offer to repair or settle by paying the owner a sum to cover the cost of repairing the defect. The homeowner has the option of accepting the offer or rejecting the offer and filing suit. Under the statute the courts must abate any homeowner legal action until the homeowner has undertaken the claims process. The law also requires contractors, subcontractors and other covered under the law to notify homeowners of the right to cure process.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Coconut Creek Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Tri-County Home Builders
    Local # 1073
    PO Box 420
    Marianna, FL 32447

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Tallahassee Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1064
    1835 Fiddler Court
    Tallahassee, FL 32308

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Okaloosa-Walton Cos
    Local # 1056
    1980 Lewis Turner Blvd
    Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of West Florida
    Local # 1048
    4400 Bayou Blvd Suite 45
    Pensacola, FL 32503

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Florida Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 1000
    PO Box 1259
    Tallahassee, FL 32302

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Columbia County Builders Association
    Local # 1007
    PO Box 7353
    Lake City, FL 32055

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Northeast Florida Builders Association
    Local # 1024
    103 Century 21 Dr Ste 100
    Jacksonville, FL 32216

    Coconut Creek Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Coconut Creek Florida


    Arizona Supreme Court Clarifies Area Variance Standard; Property Owners May Obtain an Area Variance When Special Circumstances Existed at Purchase

    Candlebrook Adds Dormitories With $230 Million Purchase

    2017 Construction Outlook: Slow, Mature Growth, but No Decline, Expected

    Ninth Circuit Rules Supreme Court’s Two-Part Test of Implied Certification under the False Claims Act Mandatory

    Up in Smoke - 5th Circuit Finds No Coverage for Hydrochloric Acid Spill Based on Pollution Exclusion

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    Can a Contractor be Liable to Second Buyers of Homes for Construction Defects?

    CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under Limited Circumstances

    Trump Soho May Abandon Condos to Operate Mainly as Hotel

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    Jinx: Third Circuit Rules in Favor of Teamsters in Withdrawal Case

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    Three Construction Workers Injured at Former GM Plant

    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Two Firm Members Among the “Best Lawyers in America”

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Construction Defects Up Price and Raise Conflict over Water Treatment Expansion

    Ohio Condo Development Case Filed in 2011 is Scheduled for Trial

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    NTSB Issues 'Urgent' Recommendations After Mass. Pipeline Explosions

    No Coverage for Restoring Aesthetic Uniformity

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Slavin Doctrine and Defense from Patent Defects

    NAHB Examines Single-Family Detached Concentration Statistics

    Court Throws Wet Blanket On Prime Contractor's Attorneys' Fees Request In Prompt Payment Case

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Ruling On Certificates Of Merit And “Gist Of Action” May Make It More Difficult For An Architect Or Engineer To Seek An Early Dismissal

    Form Contracts are Great, but. . .

    “Pay When Paid” Provisions May Not Be Dead, at Least Not Yet

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

    Georgia Supreme Court Limits Damages Under Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act

    Construction Litigation—Battles on Many Fronts

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Court Finds No Occurrence for Installation of Defective flooring and Explains Coverage for Attorney Fee Awards

    Alabama Still “An Outlier” on Construction Defects

    Pennsylvania Considers Changes to Construction Code Review

    Municipalities Owe a Duty to Pedestrians Regardless of Whether a Sidewalk Presents an “Open and Obvious” Hazardous Condition. (WA)

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Ex-Ironworkers Local President Sentenced to Prison Term for Extortion

    Embattled SNC-Lavalin Files Ethics Appeal, Realigns Structure

    Construction Contract Provisions that Should Pique Your Interest

    Construction Defect Lawsuits May Follow Hawaii Condo Boom

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim
    Corporate Profile

    COCONUT CREEK FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Coconut Creek, Florida Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Coconut Creek'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
    Coconut Creek, Florida

    Comparative Breach of Contract – The New Benefit of the Bargain in Construction?

    October 26, 2020 —
    Ask most Florida Construction Law practitioners, and you will likely hear that liability may not be apportioned in “pure” breach of contract cases via the Comparative Fault Act, section 768.81, Florida Statutes (the “Act”). If a material breach is a “substantial factor” in causing damages, the breaching party must answer for all damages that were reasonably contemplated by the parties when they formed the contract. Claimants argue that matters of contract should be governed strictly by the agreement, and risk can be controlled by negotiated terms, including waivers and limitations. Defendants complain that construction projects are collaborative, multi-party affairs, and strict application of contract principles leads to harsh results for relatively minor comparative fault for the same or overlapping damages. The notion of apportioning purely economic loss contract damages based on comparative fault is not new. Since April 2006, Florida has been a “pure” comparative fault jurisdiction with limited exceptions. Prior to the amendment, tort liability for non-economic damages was purely comparative, but liability for economic damages was typically a combination of joint and several liability with an additional exposure based on comparative fault. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steven Hoffman, Cole, Scott & Kissane
    Mr. Hoffman may be contacted at Steven.Hoffman@csklegal.com

    Colorado Requires Builders to Accommodate High-Efficiency Devices in New Homes

    December 14, 2020 —
    Starting in 2009, the Colorado Legislature began adding requirements that builders offer certain options to accommodate high-efficiency devices. These requirements started with solar prewire options in 2009, then water-smart home options in 2010. In 2020, the Legislature added requirements for electric vehicle charging and heating systems. These sections apply to unoccupied homes serving as sales inventory or a model home or manufactured homes, as defined by Colorado law. While the Legislature has only required builders to include options to accommodate these devices, it may be just a matter of time until builders must install the prescribed devices themselves. In 2009, the Legislature passed C.R.S. 38-35.7-106, which was amended this year by HB 20-1155. As it now reads, Colorado law requires every builder of single-family detached residences to offer to have the home’s electrical or plumbing system, or both, include:
    1. A residential photovoltaic solar generation system or a residential thermal system, or both;
    2. Upgrades of wiring or plumbing, or both, planned by the builder to accommodate future installation of such systems; and
    3. A chase or conduit, or both, constructed to allow ease of future installation of the necessary wiring or plumbing for such systems.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    First-Party Statutory Bad Faith – 60 Days to Cure Means 60 Days to Cure

    October 19, 2020 —
    In a first party bad-faith lawsuit, such as a bad faith claim against an insured’s property insurer, there are three requirements that must be met before the bad faith lawsuit is filed: “‘(1) determination of the insurer’s liability for coverage; (2) determination of the extent of the insured’s damages; and (3) the required notice must be filed under section 624.155(3)(a).’” Fortune v. First Protective Ins. Co., 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2092a (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (citation omitted). The third requirement is for the insured to file a Civil Remedy Notice (known as a “CRN”) as a condition precedent to filing a statutory bad faith lawsuit giving the insurer 60 days’ notice of the bad faith violation and to cure the violation, i.e., pay the claim if the violation is payment. A very common bad faith payment violation is the assertion that the insurer did NOT attempt “in good faith to settle claims when, under the circumstances, it could and should have done so, had it acted fairly and honestly towards its insured and with due regard for his or her interests.” Fla. Stat. s. 624.155(1)(b)(1). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Dust Obscures Eleventh Circuit’s Ruling on “Direct Physical Loss”

    October 12, 2020 —
    On August 18, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a District Court’s 2018 ruling that Sparta Insurance Company need not cover a south Florida restaurant’s lost income and extra expenses resulting from nearby road construction. But, in doing so, the appeals court appears to deviate from even its own understanding of “direct physical loss” under controlling Florida law. In the underlying coverage action, the insured, Mama Jo’s Inc. operating as Berries in the Grove, sought coverage under its “all risk” commercial property insurance policy for business income loss and incurred extra expenses caused by construction dust and debris that migrated into the restaurant. Reprinted courtesy of Walter J. Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Andrews may be contacted at wandrews@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Federal District Rejects Another Construction Defect Claim

    November 30, 2020 —
    The Federal District Court, District of Hawaii, continued it long line of cases finding no coverage for claims of faulty workmanship. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Summary Judgment RMB Enters., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200468 (D. Haw. Oct. 28, 2020). Property owners entered a construction contract with RMB Enterprises to develop and construct residential structures and a pond. The pond walls enclosed residential spaces, providing structural foundations for the walls of the building. After completion of the project, the pond leaked into its pump room. RMB performed remedial work by injecting epoxy into cracks. Later, water from the pondleaked into the interior of a residence near a staircase. Water also leaked into the master bedroom area causing musty odor, mood growth, and increased humidity. The owners sued RMB asserting breach of contract, breach of warranty, misrepresentation, and negligence claims. Nautilus denied coverage. The policy provided that faulty workmanship did not constitute an "occurrence." But when faulty workmanship caused property damage to property other than "your work," then such property damage would be considered caused by an occurrence. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Federal Judge Refuses to Limit Coverage and Moves Forward with Policyholder’s Claims Against Insurer and Broker

    December 07, 2020 —
    On November 10, 2020, a New York federal judge dismissed an insurer’s counterclaims seeking to cap its exposure under a $15 million sublimit and an order estopping the policyholder from pursuing any additional amounts. In February 2017, Plaintiff Pilkington North America, Inc. (Pilkington), suffered between $60 and $100 million in damage from a tornado that struck its glass manufacturing factory in Illinois. Pilkington sought coverage for its loss under a commercial property and business interruption policy issued by Defendant Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company (MSI). Pilkington also claimed its insurance broker, Aon Risk Services Central, Inc. (Aon), is liable for faulty advice provided while brokering the policy. Aon’s negligence allegedly gave way to MSI’s fraudulent revision of the insurance policy, which caused the losses from the tornado to not be fully compensable. Pilkington’s fraud and faulty brokering claims stem from MSI’s revision of an endorsement contained in the policy. The revision changed the wording of a windstorm sublimit. Allegedly, Aon was informed by MSI of the changes and failed to inform Pilkington that the revision would substantially reduce coverage for windstorms, including tornados. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth
    Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com

    Topic 606: A Retrospective Review of Revenue from Contracts with Customers

    October 12, 2020 —
    The anticipation has been building regarding implementation of the new revenue recognition standard, known as Topic 606, by private companies. Public companies have reported under Topic 606 since the beginning of 2019. For private companies, the time is now. As of January 2020, private companies became subject to Topic 606 for all entities with a year-end of Dec. 31, 2019, or subsequent. However, with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting businesses across the board, this year any company with a year-end financial statement not yet issued can defer implementation of Topic 606 until the contractors’ next year end that falls after Dec. 15, 2020. What have we learned about the impact of Topic 606, if any, on construction contractors’ financial statements? The most significant impact relates to the presentation of contract assets and contract liabilities, and the disclosures associated with Topic 606. The recording of what is known as “the cost to fulfill a contract” is another area that has been affected. PRESENTATION OF CONTRACT ASSET AND CONTRACT LIABILITY A contract asset is defined in Topic 606 as an entity’s right to consideration in exchange for goods or services the entity has transferred to a customer, conditional on something other than the passage of time. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Sisk & Robert Mercado, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Sisk may be contacted at Christopher.sisk@marcumllp.com Mr. Mercado may be contacted at Robert.mercado@marcumllp.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    November 23, 2020 —
    The existing built environment structure—arguably—is antiquated and must be disrupted to meet the rapidly changing demands of the industry. The built environment struggles with labor shortages, addressing demand, sustainability needs, cost controls, affordability and efficiency gains. Even with the advancement of emerging technology trends, the construction industry still lags behind more technologically advanced verticals. What’s missing? Something is needed beyond incremental change that will truly disrupt the industry, increase the value of other innovations and tackle industry challenges. The answer is industrialized construction technology with offsite manufacturing as the cornerstone. Technology innovation becomes exponentially more valuable when placed in this context. Shadow Ventures, a venture capital firm focused on the built environment, set out to test these theories with verifiable research published this year in a report titled, “Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox.” Reprinted courtesy of Brian Sayre, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of