BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois hospital construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois Medical building Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois low-income housing Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois production housing Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois parking structure Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois custom homes Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois tract home Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois institutional building Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois retail construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois mid-rise construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois housing Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois structural steel construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois casino resort Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois landscaping construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois condominiums Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois office building Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois Subterranean parking Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois industrial building Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois condominium Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois townhome construction Building Consultant Richton Park Illinois
    Richton Park Illinois hospital construction expert witnessRichton Park Illinois architectural expert witnessRichton Park Illinois OSHA expert witness constructionRichton Park Illinois construction forensic expert witnessRichton Park Illinois civil engineering expert witnessRichton Park Illinois consulting general contractorRichton Park Illinois expert witnesses fenestration
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Richton Park, Illinois

    Illinois Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB4873 Pending: The Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act provides that a construction professional shall be liable to a homeowner for damages caused by the acts or omissions of the professional and his or her agents, employees, or subcontractors. This bill requires the service of notice to the professional of the complained-of defect in the construction by the homeowner prior to commencement of a lawsuit. Allows the professional to make an offer of repair or settlement and to rescind this offer if the claimant fails to respond within 30 days.


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Richton Park Illinois

    No state license required for general contracting. License required for roofing.


    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    SouthWest Suburban Home Builders Association
    Local # 1432
    10767 W 163rd Pl
    Orland Park, IL 60467

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Northern Illinois Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1434
    3695 Darlene Ct Ste 102
    Aurora, IL 60504

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kankakee
    Local # 1445
    221 S Schuyler Ave Ste B
    Kankakee, IL 60901

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Fox Valley
    Local # 1431
    PO Box 1146
    Saint Charles, IL 60174

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Chicago
    Local # 1425
    5999 S. New Wilke Rd Ste 104
    Rolling Meadows, IL 60008

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Greater Peoria
    Local # 1455
    1599 N Main Street
    East Peoria, IL 61611

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of the Greater Rockford Area
    Local # 1465
    631 N Longwood St Suite 102
    Rockford, IL 61107

    Richton Park Illinois Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Richton Park Illinois


    Hirer Liable for Injury to Subcontractor’s Employee Due to Failure to Act, Not Just Affirmative Acts, Holds Court of Appeal

    This Times Square Makeover Is Not a Tourist Attraction

    Entire Fairness or Business Judgment? It’s Anyone’s Guess

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    General Contractor Cited for Safety Violations after Worker Fatality

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

    Plaintiffs In Construction Defect Cases to Recover For Emotional Damages?

    Unqualified Threat to Picket a Neutral is Unfair Labor Practice

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    Haight Welcomes Elizabeth Lawley

    Impasse Over Corruption Charges Costs SNC $3.7 Billion, CEO Says

    Elevators Take Sustainable Smart Cities to the Next Level

    Duty to Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    California Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Regulate Replacement Cost Estimates

    Builders Beware: A New Class Of Defendants In Asbestos Lawsuits

    Slip and Fall Claim from Standing Water in Parking Garage

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Substitution Hearings Under California’s Listing Law

    Stormy Seas Ahead: 5th Circuit to Review Whether Maritime Law Applies to Offshore Service Contract

    Insurers' Communications Through Brokers Not Privileged

    City of Birmingham Countersues Contractor for Incomplete Work

    Health Care Construction Requires Compassion, Attention to Detail and Flexibility

    After Elections, Infrastructure Talk Stirs Again

    Real-Estate Pros Fight NYC Tax on Wealthy Absentee Owners

    Learning from Production Homes of the Past

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California FAIR Plan Limited to Coverage Provided by Statutory Fire Insurance Policy

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    Rhode Island Examines a Property Owner’s Intended Beneficiary Status and the Economic Loss Doctrine in the Context of a Construction Contract

    Rihanna Gained an Edge in Construction Defect Case

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Testimony from Insureds' Expert Limited By Motion In Limine

    Little Known Florida Venue Statue Benefitting Resident Contractors

    Know What’s Under Ground and Make Smarter Planning Decisions

    Is Construction Defect Litigation a Cause for Lack of Condos in Minneapolis?

    Know When Your Claim “Accrues” or Risk Losing It

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion

    Surviving a Tornado – How to Navigate Insurance Claims in the Wake of the Recent Connecticut Storm

    Hunton Andrews Kurth Associate Cary D. Steklof Selected to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite Up & Comers List for 2019
    Corporate Profile

    RICHTON PARK ILLINOIS BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Richton Park, Illinois Building Consultant Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Richton Park'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
    Richton Park, Illinois

    Tetra Tech-U.S. Cleanup Dispute in San Francisco Grows

    July 15, 2019 —
    The U.S. Justice Dept. and consultant Tetra Tech are ramping up a battle over alleged false claims for payment the firm submitted to the U.S. Navy under $261 million in contracts for radiological tests and cleanup at San Francisco’s former Hunters Point base, a Superfund site being developed for up to 12,000 residential units. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    July 01, 2019 —
    Florida contractors will soon have a level playing field, at least related to the right to recovery of attorney fees in certain circumstances. Effective October 1, 2019, the Florida statute by which legal fees may be recovered from insurers and sureties was amended to expressly afford that right to contractors. Florida’s Insurance statute, Chapter 627, affords a right to recovery of attorney fees when a judgment is obtained against an insurer and in favor of any insured pursuant to a policy or contract executed by the insurer. See Fla. Stat. § 627.428. In the construction context, the Florida Legislature has also applied this right to the recovery of attorney fees from sureties, for example in circumstances where suit is brought against a surety under a payment or performance bond. See Fla. Stat. § 627.756. But there was an oddity to this statute – it specifically provided this right for “owners” and “subcontractors”, but “contractors” were skipped over. For as long as Section 627.756, Florida Statutes has been on the books, the right to recovery of attorney fees against a surety under a payment or performance bond was only afforded to owners, subcontractors, laborers, and materialmen. Specifically, since at least 1977, Section 627.756, Florida Statutes substantially provided as follows (emphasis added): Section 627.428 applies to suits brought by owners, subcontractors, laborers, and materialmen against a surety insurer under payment or performance bonds written by the insurer under the laws of this state to indemnify against pecuniary loss by breach of a building or construction contract. Owners, subcontractors, laborers, and materialmen shall be deemed to be insureds or beneficiaries for the purposes of this section. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Warren E. Friedman - Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Friedman may be contacted at wfriedman@pecklaw.com

    Motion to Strike Insurer's Expert Opinion Granted

    August 13, 2019 —
    The court granted the insured's motion to strike the testimony of the insurer's expert because the opinion lacked sufficient explanation or analysis. Affinity Mut. Ins. v. Thacker Air Conditioning Refrigeration Heating, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84713 (N.D. Ind. May 20, 2019). The insured owned a market that needed renovations. The roof over an addition to the market extended from the wall of the extension to the top of the existing roof. The area between the old and new roofs was filled with blown-in insulation, so that the structural support from the new overbuilt roof was not visible. The weight of the overbuilt roof rested on top of the existing roof at the point where they met. This added additional weight on the trusses supporting the main roof. In 2014, the market upgraded the building with heating and insulation. Thacker was a subcontractor for work on the hearing system. Six gas furnaces, spaced about 35 feet apart along the length of the building, were placed by Thacker. The total weight of each unit was estimated at 280 pounds. 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

    Notice of Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Deadline

    August 13, 2019 —
    The California Mechanics Lien is one of the most valuable collection devices available to contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who are unpaid for work performed and materials supplied in relation to a California Private Works project. The mechanics lien allows the claimant to sell the property where the work was performed in order to obtain payment. The process starts with the recording of a mechanics lien in the office of the County Recorder where the property in question is located. As noted below, certain deadlines must be met. Know Your Mechanics Lien Filing Deadlines Generally Working within deadlines is absolutely crucial to preserving mechanics lien rights under California law. The deadlines differ, depending on whether you are a ”direct” contractor, also known as “original” or “prime” contractor (one who contracts directly with the property owner) or a subcontractor or material supplier. The primary differences are that, the direct contractor is only required to serve the “Preliminary Notice” on the Construction Lender (Civil Code section 8200-8216), whereas the subcontractor and material supplier must serve not only the Construction Lender, but also the Owner and Direct Contractor (see Civil Code section 8200(e)). Another difference is that a direct contractor has a longer period of time in which to record a mechanics lien after a valid “notice of completion” or a “notice of cessation” has been recorded (Civil Code sections 8180-8190), (60 days for original contractors as compared to 30 days for subcontractors and suppliers – See Civil Code sections 8412 and 8414). A further general description of the rules is as follows: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    When an Insurer Proceeds as Subrogee, Defendants Cannot Assert Contribution Claims Against the Insured

    July 15, 2019 —
    In Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. of Mason County v. Stove Builder Int’l, 2019 U.S. Dist. Lexis 46993 (E.D. Ky.), the United States District Court for the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Kentucky, by adopting a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendations, see Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Stove Builder, Int’l, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48103 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 11, 2019), considered whether to allow the defendants to file a third-party complaint against the plaintiff’s insureds-subrogors. Finding that the defendants could not pursue contribution claims against the plaintiff’s insureds-subrogors, the court denied the defendant’s motion to file a third-party complaint. The underlying subrogation action involved allegations of strict liability, negligence and breach of warranty against a pellet heater manufacturer and the retailer who sold the heater. The claims arose from a fire allegedly originating from the heater, which spread to the insureds-subrogors’ home causing property damage, along with consequential damages. Pursuant to the applicable insurance policy, the insureds-subrogors’ insurer issued payments to its insureds-subrogors. Thereafter, the insurer filed suit against the heater manufacturer and retailer. The defendants filed a motion for leave to file a third-party complaint against the plaintiff’s insureds-subrogors, seeking to assert a contribution claim. The defendants alleged that the insureds-subrogors failed to properly install and maintain the pellet heater. The defendants also sought a jury instruction that would permit the jury to apportion fault to the insureds-subrogors, resulting in a reduction of the plaintiff’s recovery. The court looked to federal procedural law, but Kentucky substantive law to decide the defendants’ motion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com

    Appellate Court reverses district court’s finding of alter ego in Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation v. Christopher Hinds (2019WL2865935)

    August 13, 2019 —
    Division V of the Colorado Court of Appeals addressed, for the first time, corporate veil-piercing in the context of a single-member, single-purpose LLC that is managed under a contract by another company. On July 3, 2019, the Court of Appeals reversed the order of the Honorable Ross B. Buchannan, Denver District Court Judge (17CA2102), who held that Plaintiff/Appellee Christopher Hinds satisfied the elements required to pierce the corporate veil of Sedgwick Properties Development Corporation (“Sedgwick”). Background Defendant 1950 Logan, LLC (“1950 Logan”) was the developer of a building located at 1950 Logan Street, in Denver, called The Tower on the Park (“Project”), which contained 141 individually owned condominium units. The Project was completed in 2006. 1950 Logan was a single-purpose entity created for the construction of the Project, which is a common practice in the construction industry. After the units were sold in 2006, the LLC wrapped up operations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Frank Ingham, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Ingham may be contacted at ingham@hhmrlaw.com

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    June 25, 2019 —
    In your next contract, consider including some (or all!) of the following clauses to limit your liability and maximize your profits. Waiver of Consequential Damages While a proven breach of contract will leave a design professional or contractor exposed to direct or compensatory damages, a waiver of consequential damages will help “stop the bleeding” and protect the design professional or contractor from paying every damage that might flow from the breach. Consequential damages include those damages which indirectly flow from the breach of contract, for example, lost rents, lost profits, lost use, lost opportunity, loss of employee productivity, and damages to reputation. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has included a mutual waiver of consequential damages in its sample A201 for over 20 years. The AIA provision includes a definition of consequential damages which are waived, including many of the examples cited above. However, the AIA waiver of consequential damages clause carves out an exception for liquidated damages to the owner. Prudent design professionals and contractors will strike this exception so as not to render the clause meaningless. A well-drafted waiver clause will be mutual, will define which damages are consequential versus direct, and will not contain exceptions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tara Lynch - Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani
    Ms. Lynch may be contacted at tlynch@grsm.com

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    November 04, 2019 —
    A detailed and coherent construction agreement in place on every job minimizes confusion, makes clear everyone’s respective responsibilities and reduces disputes. There are six things that should be addressed in every construction agreement. DEFINE THE SCOPE Define what the scope of work is that will be provided. Will it be only materials; will it be materials and labor; or will it be just labor? Be very clear and specific in how the scope of work is spelled out. Many contracts state that the contractor is responsible for all work that’s shown on the plans and specifications, as well as that which is reasonably inferable. While subjective—even if not actually on the plans or specifications, someone may believe that something should be part of the contractor’s work. This could expand what has to be done beyond what was understood or priced. LIST ALL THE EXCLUSIONS Do the parties each have the same understanding as to what is covered in the contract? How often are contractors faced with customers thinking something was included as part of the work? The contractor may have believed that task, or that material, or that specially fabricated item was excluded. But was it? Did the contractor articulate what was and was not in the scope and price? Specifically listing what is excluded can obviate this problem. Articulate what is not in the price or scope and reduce the chance of one party believing that something is to be done when it isn't. Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Barthet, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Barthet may be contacted at pbarthet@barthet.com