BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building expert witness Tampa Florida concrete tilt-up expert witness Tampa Florida casino resort expert witness Tampa Florida institutional building expert witness Tampa Florida structural steel construction expert witness Tampa Florida condominiums expert witness Tampa Florida townhome construction expert witness Tampa Florida low-income housing expert witness Tampa Florida high-rise construction expert witness Tampa Florida custom home expert witness Tampa Florida housing expert witness Tampa Florida industrial building expert witness Tampa Florida hospital construction expert witness Tampa Florida tract home expert witness Tampa Florida office building expert witness Tampa Florida landscaping construction expert witness Tampa Florida condominium expert witness Tampa Florida mid-rise construction expert witness Tampa Florida Subterranean parking expert witness Tampa Florida multi family housing expert witness Tampa Florida retail construction expert witness Tampa Florida parking structure expert witness Tampa Florida
    Tampa Florida construction scheduling expert witnessTampa Florida engineering consultantTampa Florida consulting architect expert witnessTampa Florida construction defect expert witnessTampa Florida window expert witnessTampa Florida building code compliance expert witnessTampa Florida architectural expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Tampa, 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 Tampa Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Polk County Builders Association
    Local # 1028
    2232 Heritage Dr
    Lakeland, FL 33801

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Tampa Bay Builders Association
    Local # 1036
    11242 Winthrop Main St
    Riverview, FL 33578

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders & CA of Brevard
    Local # 1012
    1500 W Eau Gallie Blvd Ste A
    Melbourne, FL 32935

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Highlands County Builders Association
    Local # 1022
    PO Box 7546
    Sebring, FL 33872
    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Manatee - Sarasota County
    Local # 1041
    8131 Lakewood Main St Ste 207
    Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Hernando Bldrs Assoc
    Local # 1010
    7391 Sunshine Grove Rd
    Brooksville, FL 34613

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Treasure Coast Builders Association
    Local # 1030
    6560 South Federal Highway
    Port Saint Lucie, FL 34952

    Tampa Florida Construction Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Tampa Florida


    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    South Carolina Law Clarifies Statue of Repose

    Tesla’s Solar Roof Pricing Is Cheap Enough to Catch Fire

    Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016–-Federalizing Trade Secret Law

    California’s Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements: Public Works and AB 3018, What You Need to Know

    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    New York’s Lawsky Proposes Changes to Reduce Home Foreclosures

    Dusseldorf Evacuates About 4,000 as World War II Bomb Defused

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Reversing Itself, Alabama Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect is An Occurrence

    D.R. Horton Earnings Rise as Sales and Order Volume Increase

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Court Addresses Damages Under Homeowners Insurance Policy

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Insurer’s Optional Appeals Process Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations Following Unequivocal Written Denial

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    Colorado’s Three-Bill Approach to Alleged Construction Defect Issues

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Florida High-Rise for Sale, Construction Defects Possibly Included

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    Sweet News for Yum Yum Donuts: Lost Goodwill is Not an All or Nothing Proposition

    Why Insurers and Their Attorneys Need to Pay Close Attention to Their Discovery Burden in Washington

    Home Sales and Stock Price Up for D. R. Horton

    New Highway for Olympics Cuts off Village near Sochi, Russia

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Construction Defect Leads to Death of Worker

    District Court denies Carpenters Union Motion to Dismiss RICO case- What it Means

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

    Claims for Breach of Express Indemnity Clauses Subject to 10-Year Statute of Limitations

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    EPC Contractors Procuring from Foreign Companies need to Reconsider their Contracts

    Expansion of Statutes of Limitations and Repose in K-12 and Municipal Construction Contracts

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Insuring the Indemnitor's Obligation

    Roof's "Cosmetic" Damage From Hail Storm Covered

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    The Prompt Payment Act Obligation is Not Triggered When the Owner Holds Less Retention from the General Contractor

    Why Clinton and Trump’s Infrastructure Plans Leave Us Wanting More

    Reroof Blamed for $10 Million in Damage

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    The Condo Conundrum: 10 Reasons Why There's a 'For Sale' Shortage in Seattle

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Home Buyers will Pay More for Solar

    Did You Really Accept That Bid? – How Contractors Can Avoid Post-Acceptance Bid Disputes Over Contract Terms

    Walmart Seeks Silicon Valley Vibe for New Arkansas Headquarters

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected
    Corporate Profile

    TAMPA FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Tampa, 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 Tampa'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
    Tampa, Florida

    California’s Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements: Public Works and AB 3018, What You Need to Know

    December 09, 2019 —
    Do you have the proper skilled and trained workforce for your construction projects? If you take on public works projects in California, you may not be in compliance with the new changes in the law. To avoid civil penalties or nonpayment and potentially being precluded from future bids on public works contracts, you must critically review your team and proposal prior to accepting an award. Once awarded a public contact requiring a skilled and trained workforce, diligent reporting practices and oversight are required to maintain compliance. Compliance with California’s skilled and trained workforce requirements for contractors, engineers, architects, design professionals, and suppliers competing for public works construction projects in California is mandated through enforcement with the enactment of AB 3018. Signed by Governor Brown in his last legislative session, AB 3018 dramatically increased the penalties for non-compliance with the existing skilled and trained workforce requirements in California. The new penalties include civil fines by the Labor Commissioner up to $10,000 per month per non-compliant contractor, disqualification from bidding on future public works contract, and withholding of payment for delinquent contractors. This update provides information on California’s skilled and trained workforce requirements, identifies key issues on compliance to avoid penalties, and discusses the impact of enforcement on construction professionals’ business practices. Reprinted courtesy of Brenda Radmacher, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani and Nicholas Krebs, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani Ms. Radmacher may be contacted at bradmacher@grsm.com Mr. Krebs may be contacted at nkrebs@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

    January 06, 2020 —
    The constant political back-and-forth in British Columbia, Canada, over how to deal with an aging George Massey Tunnel, opened in 1959, has ping-ponged from uncertainty to a $3.5 billion, 10-lane bridge, back to uncertainty, to no bridge and now to an eight-lane submerged tunnel. Tim Newcomb, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    October 14, 2019 —
    Determining the scope of discovery can be challenging, particularly when an insurance bad faith claim is involved. Courts often face the difficult decision of weighing the importance of preserving attorney-client privilege with the public policy rationale of protecting an insured against their insurer’s bad faith behavior. The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently recognized this dilemma by rejecting a hardline approach to bad faith discovery disputes and adopting a case-by-case analysis. The case, In re Mt. Hawley Ins. Co.,1 arose out of a construction defect claim. ContraVest Construction Company (“ContraVest”) constructed a development in South Carolina and was later sued for alleged defective construction. ContraVest sought coverage for the lawsuit from its insurers, including Mount Hawley Insurance Company (“Mount Hawley”), which had provided excess commercial liability insurance to ContraVest during the relevant timeframe. Mount Hawley denied the claim, which prompted ContraVest to sue it for bad faith, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Never, Ever, Ever Assume! (Or, How a Stuck Shoe is Like a Construction Project Assumption)

    October 21, 2019 —
    This summer, I had the fortune of taking a trip to Europe. The first place I visited was Amsterdam. A lovely town with a lot of culture and more canals than you can shake a stick at. I was meeting family there, but had hours to kill ahead of time. So, I decided to take the train from the airport into the City Centre, leave my bags at the train station luggage locker, and begin exploring. My plan took its first misstep when I attempted to board the train. Not being in a hurry, I let the other passengers get on first. Sure, I noticed the train conductor blowing his whistle while I stepped onto the train, but figured I was fine since I was already on the steps up. Until, that is, the door began to close, with me in the doorway, suitcase in the train, one foot inside, and one foot mid step up to the cabin. The door closed on my backpack (which was still on my back), but I managed to force it into the train compartment. My shoe, however, was not quite as lucky. Part of my shoe made it inside, and part was outside the door. No worry– just look for the door release mechanism, right? Wrong! There was none. The train started up, with my shoe still halfway in and halfway out of the train. (Luckily my foot itself made it inside all in one piece). The conductor came along to scold me, and told me that he could *probably* rescue my shoe once we got to Central Station. In the meantime, I sat on a nearby jump seat, keeping tabs on my shoe and fuming that this was *not* the way I planned to start my vacation. Long story short– the train conductor was able to salvage my shoe, but not without a lot of commentary on how I should never have boarded the train after the whistle blew. Lesson learned. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Haight Welcomes New Attorneys to Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco

    October 07, 2019 —
    Haight Brown & Bonesteel is happy to announce the addition of new attorneys to our Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco offices.
    • Alexandra Angel – Los Angeles: Alexandra is a member of the firm’s Business Solutions, General Liability and Transportation Law Practice Groups. Her practice focuses on a variety of civil litigation matters involving premises liability, personal injury, judgment collection, breach of contract, and landlord-tenant. Her clients have included individual private clients, international property management companies, national and local real estate investment companies, a large car finance company, and local businesses.
    • Josh Maltzer – San Francisco: Josh is a partner in the firm’s Construction Law, General Liability and Risk Management & Insurance Law Practice Groups. He is a seasoned civil litigator who focuses his practice on construction defect, general liability and insurance coverage. Josh is an experienced trial attorney who has litigated matters in state and federal courts throughout California and in Arizona, Washington and Wyoming. He has represented business owners, property managers, developers, real estate purchasers and public housing agencies in matters that resulted in millions of dollars in insurance recovers, judgments and settlements for his client.
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel attorneys Alexandra Angel, Josh A. Maltzer, Philip E. McDermott, Patrick F. McIntyre, Evan M. Reese, and Amanda F. Riley Ms. Angel may be contacted at aangel@hbblaw.com Mr. Maltzer may be contacted at jmaltzer@hbblaw.com Mr. McDermott may be contacted at pmcdermott@hbblaw.com Mr. McIntyre may be contacted at pmcintyre@hbblaw.com Mr. Reese may be contacted at ereese@hbblaw.com Ms. Riley may be contacted at ariley@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    December 02, 2019 —
    Today, Governor Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 5 (“AB5”), controversial legislation which will have a substantial impact on California employers when it goes into effect on January 1, 2020. AB5 enacts into a statute last year’s California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), and the Court’s three-part standard (the “ABC test”) for determining whether a worker may be classified as an employee or an independent contractor. Under the ABC test established in Dynamex and now under AB5, a worker may be properly considered an independent contractor only if the hiring entity establishes all three of the following: (A) that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hirer in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact; (B) that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and (C) that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hiring entity. Reprinted courtesy of Eric C. Sohlgren, Payne & Fears and Matthew C. Lewis, Payne & Fears Mr. Sohlgren may be contacted at ecs@paynefears.com Mr. Lewis may be contacted at mcl@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    October 21, 2019 —
    A Louisiana court recently denied an excess insurer’s bid for summary judgment, finding that the insurer’s interpretation of a pollution exclusion would lead to “absurd results.” Central Crude, Inc., a crude oil transporter company, experienced an oil pipeline leak, allegedly causing damage to property belonging to Columbia Gas Transmission Company. Columbia Gas sued Central Crude seeking compensatory damages and injunctive relief to compel remediation of the site. Central Crude sought coverage under a CGL primary insurance policy issued by Liberty Mutual. The insurer initially agreed to cover Central Crude’s “reasonable and necessary costs” relating to the incident, but later refused to defend or indemnify Central Crude for any costs incurred from the incident. As a result, Central Crude brought suit against Liberty Mutual and its excess insurer, Great American, to enforce coverage. Great American moved for summary judgment arguing coverage was excluded by the excess policy’s pollution exclusion, which precludes coverage for injury “arising out of a discharge of pollutants.” Central Crude responded arguing that the exclusion’s applicability was invalidated or at least rendered ambiguous by the Following Form Endorsements, which reflect an intent to mirror the coverage afforded under the primary Liberty Mutual policy, and because coverage appears to be specifically authorized through the Premises Operations Liability Endorsement. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of