BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building Building Consultant Altha Florida office building Building Consultant Altha Florida townhome construction Building Consultant Altha Florida landscaping construction Building Consultant Altha Florida tract home Building Consultant Altha Florida multi family housing Building Consultant Altha Florida concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Altha Florida parking structure Building Consultant Altha Florida industrial building Building Consultant Altha Florida Subterranean parking Building Consultant Altha Florida housing Building Consultant Altha Florida high-rise construction Building Consultant Altha Florida hospital construction Building Consultant Altha Florida Medical building Building Consultant Altha Florida mid-rise construction Building Consultant Altha Florida structural steel construction Building Consultant Altha Florida condominiums Building Consultant Altha Florida low-income housing Building Consultant Altha Florida casino resort Building Consultant Altha Florida retail construction Building Consultant Altha Florida custom home Building Consultant Altha Florida production housing Building Consultant Altha Florida
    Altha Florida consulting general contractorAltha Florida window expert witnessAltha Florida building expertAltha Florida construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessAltha Florida expert witnesses fenestrationAltha Florida expert witness structural engineerAltha Florida architectural expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Altha, 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.


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Altha Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Tallahassee Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1064
    1835 Fiddler Court
    Tallahassee, FL 32308

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Tri-County Home Builders
    Local # 1073
    PO Box 420
    Marianna, FL 32447

    Altha Florida Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Altha Florida


    Single-Family Home Starts Seen Catching Up to Surging U.S. Sales

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Iowa Court Holds Defective Work Performed by Insured's Subcontractor Constitutes an "Occurrence"

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

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

    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    Signed, Sealed and (Almost) Delivered: EU Council Authorizes Signing of U.S. – EU Bilateral Insurance Agreement

    BHA has a Nice Swing Benefits the Wounded Warrior Project

    Court Slams the Privette Door on Independent Contractor’s Bodily Injury Claim

    Augmenting BIM Classifications – Interview with Eveliina Vesalainen of Granlund

    Homebuilder Confidence Takes a Beating

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Under the Hood of U.S. Construction Spending Is Revised Data

    LaGuardia Airport Is a Mess. An Engineer-Turned-Fund Manager Has a Fix

    How Berger’s Peer Review Role Figures In Potential Bridge Collapse Settlement

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP Attorneys to Speak at the 2016 National Construction Claims Conference

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020

    Construction Contracts Need Amending Post COVID-19 Shutdowns

    Oregon Construction Firm Sued for Construction Defects

    UK Construction Defect Suit Lost over One Word

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    Gain in Home Building Points to Sustained U.S. Growth

    Construction Industry Survey Says Optimism Hits All-Time High

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    Wilke Fleury Secures Bid Protest Denial

    If You Purchase a House at an HOA Lien Foreclosure, Are You Entitled to Excess Sale Proceeds?

    Legislation Update: S-865 Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey Passed by Both Houses-Awaiting Governor’s Signature

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    Concrete Worker Wins Lawsuit and Settles with Other Defendant

    Gilbert’s Plan for Downtown Detroit Has No Room for Jail

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    Important New Reporting Requirement for Some Construction Defect Settlements

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    GE to Repay $87 Million for Scaled-Back Headquarters Plan

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    CDJ’s #4 Topic of the Year: KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    AGC Seeks To Lead Industry in Push for Infrastructure Bill

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Fannie-Freddie Propose Liquidity Rules for Mortgage Insurers

    What to Do Before OSHA Comes Knocking

    Staying the Course, Texas Supreme Court Rejects Insurer’s Argument for Exception to Eight-Corners Rule in Determining Duty to Defend

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose
    Corporate Profile

    ALTHA FLORIDA BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Altha, Florida Building Consultant Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Altha'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.

    Building Consultant News & Info
    Altha, Florida

    Court of Appeal Holds That Higher-Tiered Party on Construction Project Can be Held Liable for Intentional Interference with Contract

    December 07, 2020 —
    In Caliber Paving Company, Inc. v. Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc., Case No. G0584406 (September 1, 2020), the 4th District Court of Appeal examined whether a higher-tiered party on a construction project can be held liable for intentional interference with contract when it interferes with the contract between lower-tiered parties even though the higher-tiered party has an economic interest in the contract between the lower-tiered parties. The Caliber Paving Case Project owner Rexford Industrial Realty and Management, Inc. owns and operates industrial property throughout Southern California. In 2017, Rexford hired contractor Steve Fodor Construction to perform repaving work at Rexford’s property in Carson, California. Fodor Construction in turn hired subcontractor Caliber Paving Company, Inc. to perform the repaving work. The subcontract divided the parking lot into four areas, with separate costs to repave each area, and Caliber completed its work in one area in June 2017. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Are Untimely Repairs an “Occurrence” Triggering CGL Coverage?

    November 16, 2020 —
    All Class A commercial contractors in Virginia are required to have a minimum level of Commercial General Liability (CGL) coverage. As a general rule, this insurance is there for damage to property or persons arising from an “occurrence” that is covered by the policy. Many cases that are litigated relating to coverage for certain events under a CGL policy turn on the definition of “occurrence” and whether the event leading to a request for coverage constitutes an “occurrence.” A recent case in Fairfax County, Virginia, Erie Insurance Exchange v. Spalding Enterprises, et al., is just such a case. In the Spalding Enterprises case, the Court considered the following scenario. A homeowner, Mr. Yen contracted with Spalding Enterprises to fix some fire damage at his home. Spalding promised the repairs would be complete in October of 2019. However, after Mr. Yen paid a $300,000.00 deposit, Spalding Enterprises stated that the work would not be completed until November of 2019. Yen then fired Spalding Enterprises and sued for breach of contract, constructive fraud, and violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. Spalding Enterprises sought coverage from Erie Insurance for the claim and Erie denied coverage and sought a declaratory judgment that the events alleged in the Complaint by Mr. Yen did not fall under the definition of “occurrence” in the CGL policy held by Spalding Enterprises. 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

    The “Climate 21 Project” Prepared for the New Administration

    December 21, 2020 —
    This is a brief review of the recently released “Climate 21 Project” policy memo. It is the work of many former members of the Obama Administration who are deeply concerned about climate change and what steps the new administration can take in the first 100 days to confront a problem. Offering “actionable advice” rather than a policy agenda, the group recognizes that Congress must do its part by providing new statutory authorities within the early days of the new administration, and the President must be prepared to aggressively exercise the powers of his office. As the members of the Group see it, there are four interlocking crises facing the President: (a) the COVID-19 pandemic; (b) the economic devastation visited upon many people by the pandemic; (c) racial injustice; and (d) accelerating threats posed by climate change. Accordingly: 1. The Executive Office of the President must take stronger steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through domestic investment, rulemakings, policy changes, and international diplomacy. A new Special Assistant for Climate Change must be created to take charge of these climate change initiatives. There should also be established in the Executive Office of the President a National Climate Change Council. All agencies must be advised of the urgency of this problem. The paper seems to envision a substantial growth in the White Hose staff. 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

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

    December 21, 2020 —
    Earlier this year I filed a complaint in a court which I won’t identify other than to say that it wasn’t the San Francisco Superior Court. Immediately upon filing the complaint the Court gave notice of a trial date. As counsel for the party bringing the action, I appreciate this, as it eliminates the back and forth jostling that can sometimes occur when trying to get a trial date. Here’s the kicker though. While I appreciate getting a trial date straight out of the gate. The date I got was . . . wait for it . . . not until 2022! Those who litigate in California state courts know that the courts are understaffed and overworked. But you’ve got to give this un-named court credit for being upfront. Forget the “well, let’s see where this goes” niceties. Trial within a year? Fugetaboutit. Trial within a year and a half. Don’t even think about it. Trial within two years. It’s about as good as you’re going to get. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Remote Trials Can Control Prejudgment Risk

    September 07, 2020 —
    While courts across the country are largely unavailable to litigants demanding a jury trial, pre-judgment interest rules present an increasing penalty risk to a defendant wanting its day in court and may not always make a plaintiff whole. The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the manner in which people and industries operate across the board. In light of the need to maintain social distancing whenever possible, the use of technology to replace in-person appearances is becoming more commonplace. As more attorneys become comfortable with the remote platform, the willingness to consider a remote trial grows. With in-person jury trials suspended until further notice, it is important for attorneys and parties to consider the attendant consequences of the indefinite delay in waiting for a traditional jury trial. Aside from general inconvenience, continued delays may have a substantial financial impact, particularly with regard to the accumulation of pre-judgment interest. Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP attorneys Robert G. Devine, Victor J. Zarrilli and Kimberly M. Collins Mr. Devine may be contacted at deviner@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Zarrilli may be contacted at zarrilliv@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Collins may be contacted at collinsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    November 23, 2020 —
    In the recent case of DeLuca v. RLI Insurance Company, 2020 WL 5931054 (October 7, 2020), the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department held that RLI had a duty to pay a judgment obtained by an underlying plaintiff against RLI’s insured, MLSC. The underlying plaintiff brought the action directly against the carrier after obtaining a judgment against MLSC, and when the judgment remained unsatisfied, serving RLI with the judgment. As an initial matter, the court found that the direct action by the plaintiff was proper under New York Insurance Law 3420(a), which allows for an injured plaintiff to maintain a direct action against a carrier if a judgment against that carrier’s insured remains unsatisfied for a period of 30 days and the carrier is served with that judgment. In that event, the plaintiff steps into the shoes of the insured and is entitled to the rights of the insured (and is also subject to the carrier’s coverage defenses). Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    February 01, 2021 —
    The court granted summary judgment to the insurer based upon an endorsement which barred coverage for injuries to employees. Northfield Ins. Co. v. Z&J Mgt. LLC, 2020 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10801 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Dec. 18, 2020). Ravi Sooklal sued his employer, Z&J Management LLC (Z&J), for injuries at the job site. Northfield, who had issued a CGL policy to Z&L, denied coverage based upon two endorsements. The first was titled "Injury to Employees of Insureds" and the second was "Employers' Liability." Northfield sued for a declaratory judgment and now moved for summary judgment. 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

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    November 30, 2020 —
    As reported in a recent Hunton Andrews Kurth client alert, Mitigating FCRA Risks in the COVID-19 World (Oct. 23, 2020), consumer litigation claims related to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) doubled in the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic. After a slight decrease in FCRA filings due to court closures and other COVID-19 restrictions, claims will likely resume their previous upward trajectory. In fact, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has already seen an uptick in consumer complaints, many of which mention COVID-19 specific keywords. Given the anticipated rise in FCRA complaints, the alert highlights the need for financial institutions and financial services companies to develop FCRA-compliant policies and procedures, including training on those policies and procedures, to mitigate the risk of FCRA-related enforcement actions and litigation claims, particularly in light of the regulatory changes relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. Another important risk mitigation tool to consider is insurance, which can offer protection when even the most robust preventative measures fail to prevent an FCRA claim. Coverage for FCRA-related claims—often from directors’ and officers’ (D&O) or errors and omissions (E&O) policies—might be broader than one would initially expect. Policies may cover defense costs involving legal fees, as well as indemnification for damages. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Matt Revis, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of