BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building Building Consultant Madrid Alabama retail construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama high-rise construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama custom home Building Consultant Madrid Alabama structural steel construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama office building Building Consultant Madrid Alabama condominiums Building Consultant Madrid Alabama industrial building Building Consultant Madrid Alabama townhome construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama low-income housing Building Consultant Madrid Alabama hospital construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama casino resort Building Consultant Madrid Alabama institutional building Building Consultant Madrid Alabama production housing Building Consultant Madrid Alabama Subterranean parking Building Consultant Madrid Alabama housing Building Consultant Madrid Alabama custom homes Building Consultant Madrid Alabama tract home Building Consultant Madrid Alabama multi family housing Building Consultant Madrid Alabama concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Madrid Alabama landscaping construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama mid-rise construction Building Consultant Madrid Alabama
    Madrid Alabama construction expert witness consultantMadrid Alabama construction expert witnessMadrid Alabama construction defect expert witnessMadrid Alabama construction claims expert witnessMadrid Alabama consulting engineersMadrid Alabama roofing construction expertMadrid Alabama construction expert witnesses
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Madrid, Alabama

    Alabama Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Although there is case law precedent for right to repair, Title 6 Article 13A states action must be commenced within 2 years after cause and not more than 13 years after completion of construction.


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Madrid Alabama

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Tallapoosa Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 0186
    714 Commerce Drive
    Alexander City, AL 35010
    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Tuscaloosa
    Local # 0188
    2009 Paul W Bryant Dr
    Tuscaloosa, AL 35401

    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Chilton County Home Builders Association
    Local # 0117
    209 Parliament Parkway
    Maylene, AL 35114
    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Lee Co Home Builders Association
    Local # 0136
    528 Lafayette Pl
    Auburn, AL 36830
    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Phenix City
    Local # 0172
    1808 Opelika Road
    Phenix City, AL 36867
    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Associated Home Builders of Greater Birmingham
    Local # 0116
    5000 Grantswood Road Ste 240
    Irondale, AL 35210

    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Greater Montgomery Home Builders Association
    Local # 0164
    6336 Woodmere Blvd
    Montgomery, AL 36117

    Madrid Alabama Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Madrid Alabama


    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    Connecticut Federal District Court Keeps Busy With Collapse Cases

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

    Illinois Non-Profit Sues over Defective Roof

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    Lack of Flood Insurance for New York’s Poorest Residents

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    Repairing One’s Own Work and the one Year Statute of Limitations to Sue a Miller Act Payment Bond

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

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

    Digitalizing the Construction Site – Interview with Tenderfield’s Jason Kamha

    Treasure Island Sues Beach Trail Designer over Concrete Defects

    The Four Forces That Will Take on Concrete and Make Construction Smart

    Be Wary of Construction Defects when Joining a Community Association

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

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

    Denver Condo Development Increasing, with Caution

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

    Are Contracting Parties Treated the Same When it Comes to Notice Obligations?

    FIFA Inspecting Brazil’s World Cup Stadiums

    DE Confirms Robust D&O Protection Despite Company Demise

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Disaster Remediation Contracts: Understanding the Law to Avoid a Second Disaster

    Deductibles Limited to Number of Suits Filed Against Insured, Not Number of Actual Plaintiffs

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Decaying U.S. Roads Attract Funds From KKR to DoubleLine

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is Proud to Announce Jeannette Garcia Has Been Elected as Secretary of the Hispanic Bar Association of Orange County!

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    Connecticut Court Holds Unresolved Coverage Issues Makes Appraisal Premature

    Banks Loosening U.S. Mortgage Standards: Chart of the Day

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Future Environmental Rulemaking Proceedings Listed in the Spring 2019 Unified Federal Agenda

    Construction Problem Halts Wind Power Park

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Tax Increase Pumps $52 Billion Into California Construction

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Building a Case: Document Management for Construction Litigation

    Differing Site Conditions Produce Differing Challenges

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    Best Practices in Construction– What are Yours?
    Corporate Profile

    MADRID ALABAMA BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Madrid, Alabama Building Consultant 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.

    Building Consultant News & Info
    Madrid, Alabama

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    January 27, 2020 —
    In a recent decision, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reiterated that the duty to defend broadly requires a liability insurer to defend an entire lawsuit against its insured, even where only some of the allegations are potentially covered. The court further held that the insured has no obligation to apportion defense costs among multiple implicated policies. The decision, Selective Way Insurance Company v. Nationwide Property and Casualty Insurance Company, et al., can be found here. The coverage litigation arose out of a construction defect case against a general contractor. The general contractor tendered the action to its insurer, Nationwide, which, in turn, filed a declaratory judgment action against the various insurers of construction project subcontractors that had named the general contractor as an additional insured. Ultimately, the court granted a summary judgment motion declaring that all of the subcontractors’ insurers had a duty to defend the general contractor “because the allegations in the underlying lawsuit raised claims that potentially arose from the [s]ubcontractors’ work at the [construction site].” All of the subcontractors’ insurers settled with Nationwide except for one, Selective Way; and the parties proceeded to a jury trial on various issues. The jury found for Nationwide on all issues. Selective Way appealed. Selective Way argued on appeal that even if some of the allegations were covered under its policy, it had no obligation to defend the general contractor because its insureds, the subcontractors, could not have been responsible for all of the losses given the nature of their work. Further, Selective Way contended that if it was responsible for defending the general contractor, it was not responsible for the entire defense, and the general contractor was responsible for apportioning the costs among the various subcontractors. The panel disagreed on both points. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Kevin V. Small, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Small may be contacted at ksmall@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    September 23, 2019 —
    On July 3, 2019, a Delaware jury determined that fourteen property insurers for Noranda Aluminum Holding Corp., an aluminum producer that filed for bankruptcy and ceased operations three years ago, owe Noranda over $35 million in time element losses that Noranda sustained as a result of two separate catastrophic incidents that occurred at its aluminum facility in 2015 and 2016. In August 2015, an aluminum explosion occurred at Noranda’s facility, resulting in substantial property damage and bodily injuries. Though the insurers paid for Noranda’s property damage claim, the insurers only covered $5.64 million of Noranda’s $22 million time element claim. In January 2016, the same facility sustained significant damage as a result of equipment failure. The insurers again paid for Noranda’s property damage claim arising from the equipment failure but declined to pay any of its $22.8 million time element claim. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews & Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews & Kurth 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

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    September 30, 2019 —
    In honor of Shark Week, that annual television-event where we eagerly flip on the Discovery Channel to get our fix of these magnificent (and terrifying!) creatures, I was inspired to write about the “predatory” practices we’ve encountered recently in our construction insurance practice. The more sophisticated the business and risk management department is, the more likely they have a sophisticated insurer writing their coverage. Although peaceful coexistence is possible, that doesn’t mean that insurers won’t use every advantage available to them – compared to even large corporate insureds, insurance companies are the apex predators of the insurance industry. In order to safeguard policyholders’ interests, most states have developed a body of law (some statutory, some based on judicial decisions) requiring insurers to act in good faith when dealing with their insureds. This is typically embodied as a requirement that the insurer act “fairly and reasonably” in processing, investigating, and handling claims. If the insurer does not meet this standard, insureds may be entitled to damages above and beyond that which they could otherwise recover for breach of contract. Proving that an insurer acted in “bad faith,” however, can be like swimming against the riptide. Most states hold that bad faith requires more than just a difference of opinion between insured and insurer over the available coverage – the policyholder must show that the insurer acted “wantonly” or “maliciously,” or, in less stringent jurisdictions, that the insurer was “unreasonable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    December 09, 2019 —
    Any general contractor understands the range of factors that go into building and sustaining a successful jobsite: hiring the right team, maintaining cutting-edge equipment, ensuring constant communication with clients and effectively leveraging the newest building technologies, just to name a few. But any good general contractor understands that there is one factor that should always be considered as top priority: jobsite safety. The health and wellbeing of a project’s team is paramount for obvious reasons, and it isn’t a lighthearted matter. Injuries and fatalities have too often been a piece of our industry’s story. In 2017 alone, there were 971 reported deaths on construction sites, which accounted for 20% of total worker fatalities, according to a report from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Of these 971 fatalities, 582 were the result of construction’s “fatal four”—falls, workers being struck by objects, electrocutions and workers being caught between equipment. For members of the industry, these are difficult numbers to read and to process; yet, it is extremely important to consider the injuries and lives lost when we take into consideration the seriousness of jobsite safety. Often, general contractors’ and superintendents’ greatest challenge isn’t being convinced of the necessity of jobsite safety practices in protecting employees or the value of safety in creating a productive work environment. Instead, the focus should be providing industry leaders tips on exactly how to improve safety measures on their own jobsites. Understanding that safety is everyone’s responsibility is paramount. Reprinted courtesy of Ray Reese, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Reese may be contacted at rreese@rives.com

    New Proposed Regulations Expand CFIUS Jurisdiction Regarding Real Estate

    January 20, 2020 —
    On September 17, 2019, the U.S. Department of Treasury issued two new proposed rules for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) implementing the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA). Of particular interest to readers of this blog was the second of the proposed rules, which addressed FIRRMA’s real estate-related expansion of CFIUS jurisdiction. Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is Your Home Improvement Contract Putting You At Risk?

    February 10, 2020 —
    If you are like many contractors, odds are that your home improvement contract (HIC) is not compliant with California law, putting you at risk for disciplinary action, voiding of the contract, and even criminal prosecution. Generally, the laws allow parties to contract how they wish. However, California HICs are an exception and California Business and Professions Code (BPC) requires much in the way of content, form and formatting for a HIC to meet the legal requirements. This is because California has written its laws to provide broad protections to homeowners when it comes to construction work performed at their residence. However, in attempting to promote this goal, the laws surrounding HICs have produced requirements that are confusing and fail to account for the realities of a home improvement project, making it difficult and uncomfortable for contractors to comply. A HIC is required for home improvement projects that change a residence or property. Specifically, the law defines a “home improvement” as “the repairing, remodeling, altering, converting, or modernizing of, or adding to, residential property and shall include, but not be limited to, the construction, erection, replacement or improvement of driveways, swimming pools, including spas and hot tubs, terraces, patios, awnings, storm windows, landscaping, fences, porches, garages, fallout shelters, basements, and other improvements of the structures or land which is adjacent to a dwelling house.” (BPC section 7151.) A HIC is not required for new residential construction; for work priced at $500 or less; the sale, installation, and service of a fire alarm or burglar system; or a service and repair contract (which has its own requirements). When a HIC is used, BPC section 7159 specifies certain content, form, and format requirements, all of which must be followed to produce a compliant HIC. While this article will not discuss all of these requirements, it will discuss some of the problems commonly seen in HICs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hannah Kreuser, Porter Law Group
    Ms. Kreuser may be contacted at hkreuser@porterlaw.com

    In Pricey California, Renters Near Respite From Landlord Gouging

    September 16, 2019 —
    The housing crisis engulfing California has state lawmakers racing to pass bills that would boost construction and stop corporate landlords from egregiously jacking up rents. The bills overcame key hurdles last week and are due for final votes before the legislature adjourns on Sept. 13. The hardest-fought measure would set a higher standard for evictions and cap annual rent increases at 5% plus the rate of inflation. While that’s below the typical pace of lease hikes -- and the bill has many caveats for landlords -- it would still mark the state’s most significant new protection for tenants in decades. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Noah Buhayar, Bloomberg

    Wes Payne Receives Defense Attorney of the Year Award

    September 30, 2019 —
    Wes Payne was recognized by the Pennsylvania Defense Institute (PDI) as the Defense Attorney of the Year. The award was given at PDI’s Annual Conference held in Bedford Springs, PA on July 11th. The annual award honors an attorney that “best exemplifies the qualities of professionalism, dedication to the practice of law, promotion of the highest ideals of justice in the community, and has a demonstrated commitment to PDI and its members.” Wes has over 30 years of experience representing insurance carriers and insureds in first and third-party litigation matters. He is Chair of the firm's Diversity Committee, Co-Chair of the Pro Bono Committee and Chair of the firm's Homeless Advocacy Group. He also serves on several pro bono and civil boards and is active in several legal organizations, holding leadership positions with many of them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wesley Payne, IV, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Payne may be contacted at paynew@whiteandwilliams.com