BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building Building Consultant Anaheim California housing Building Consultant Anaheim California retail construction Building Consultant Anaheim California multi family housing Building Consultant Anaheim California tract home Building Consultant Anaheim California institutional building Building Consultant Anaheim California concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Anaheim California mid-rise construction Building Consultant Anaheim California production housing Building Consultant Anaheim California industrial building Building Consultant Anaheim California condominium Building Consultant Anaheim California condominiums Building Consultant Anaheim California hospital construction Building Consultant Anaheim California landscaping construction Building Consultant Anaheim California structural steel construction Building Consultant Anaheim California Subterranean parking Building Consultant Anaheim California townhome construction Building Consultant Anaheim California custom homes Building Consultant Anaheim California custom home Building Consultant Anaheim California casino resort Building Consultant Anaheim California high-rise construction Building Consultant Anaheim California low-income housing Building Consultant Anaheim California
    Anaheim California multi family design expert witnessAnaheim California soil failure expert witnessAnaheim California construction project management expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness roofingAnaheim California building envelope expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness windowsAnaheim California hospital construction expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Anaheim, California

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:


    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211

    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501
    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355
    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535
    Anaheim California Building Consultant 10/ 10


    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Anaheim California


    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

    Hurricane Milton Barrels Toward Florida With 180 MPH Winds

    AMLO Hits Back at Vulcan, Threatens to Use Environmental Decree

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    OSHA Issues COVID-19 Guidance for Construction Industry

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    OSHA Begins Enforcement of its Respirable Crystalline Silica in Construction Standard. Try Saying That Five Times Real Fast

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities

    Gordon & Rees Ranks #5 in Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation

    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

    NEW DEFECT WARRANTY LAWS – Now Applicable to Condominiums and HOAs transitioning from Developer to Homeowner Control. Is Your Community Aware of its Rights Under the New Laws?

    So a Lawsuit Is on the Horizon…

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

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

    Department Of Labor Recovers $724K In Back Wages, Damages For 255 Workers After Phoenix Contractor Denied Overtime Pay, Falsified Records

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

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

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Is the Removal and Replacement of Nonconforming Work Economically Wasteful?

    Who Says You Can’t Choose between Liquidated Damages or Actual Damages?

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    How Retro-Commissioning Can Extend the Life of a Building—and the Planet

    White and Williams Announces Partner and Counsel Promotions

    Montana Supreme Court Tackles Decade-Old Coverage Dispute Concerning Asbestos Mineworker Claims

    Lennar Profit Tops Estimates as Home Prices Increase

    California Supreme Court Finds Negligent Supervision Claim Alleges An Occurrence

    Drones Used Despite Uncertain Legal Consequences

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Andrea DeField Recognized In 2024 List of Influential Business Women By South Florida Business Journal

    Top 10 OSHA Violations For The Construction Industry In 2023

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    No Coverage for Repairs Made Before Suit Filed

    You Can Take This Job and Shove It!

    Federal District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Against Implementation of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Final Rule

    Indemnity Clauses That Conflict with Oregon Indemnity Statute Can Remain Partially Valid and Enforceable

    The Importance of Engaging Design Professional Experts Early, with a Focus on Massachusetts Law

    Miller Act Statute of Limitations and Equitable Tolling

    rance Obligations
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA BUILDING CONSULTANT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California 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 more than 25 years 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
    Anaheim, California

    Insurer Waives Objection to Appraiser's Partiality by Waiting Until Appraisal Issued

    October 21, 2024 —
    The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of the insurer's objections on partiality grounds to the insured's appraiser. Biscayne Beach Club Condominium Association, Inc. v. Westchester Surpus Lines Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 19663 (11th Cir. Aug. 6. 2024). Storms damaged buildings at Biscayne Beach Club Condominium. Biscayne Beach filed claims with its insurer, Westchester. Unsatisfied with Westchester's payments, Biscayne Beach sued. Westchester then invoked the appraisal provision in the policy. The district court abated the action so the parties could pursue appraisal. Biscayne Beach appointed Lester Martin, its public adjuster, as its appraiser on a 10 percent contingency fee. Westchester objected because Martinez's retainer created a conflict of interest that would hinder his impartiality. Biscayne Beach then retained Blake Pyka as its appraiser. Westchester appointed its appraiser and and umpire was selected by the parties' two appraisers. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Executive Insights 2024: Leaders in Construction Law

    August 05, 2024 —
    The key risks that should always be taken into account when a contract is signed are risks associated with uncompensated delays and cost increases. Provisions relating to the scope of work deserve significant attention to help minimize these risks. Defining the scope of work is often put on the backburner while parties focus on negotiating the rest of the terms and conditions of the contract. And when these scopes are inserted, they are often not closely reviewed by attorneys who tend to defer to project personnel on scope. These situations can lead to costly disputes. Instead, make sure: (1) the correct plans and specifications have been referenced in the contract; (2) an attorney or his/her business counterpart is familiar with relevant specifications; (3) the exhibit containing the assumptions and clarifications is clearly written, has been coordinated with language in the body of the contract and can be clearly understood by attorneys and business people beyond the preconstruction personnel who drafted them; and (4) the contract addresses the order of precedence in the event of a conflict between or among contract provisions (including exhibits). With regard to specifications referenced above, an attorney review is advised because many specification sections, including submittal sections, change order sections, payment provisions and construction progress documentation sections, regularly vary from the negotiated sections of the actual contract. Contractors also unwittingly accept design risk through performance specifications, and the accompanying obligations and risks are underestimated by those tasked with the initial review of those documents. In sum, a clear scope is as important as clear terms and conditions. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the full story...

    For Whom Additional Insured Coverage Applies in New York

    November 11, 2024 —
    Simply including a requirement in a contract to add certain parties as additional insureds under a commercial general liability insurance (CGL) policy may not be enough to ensure such coverage is provided in New York. In New York City Hous. Auth. v. Harleysville Worcester Ins. Co., 226 A.D.3d 804 (2024), the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division – Second Department ruled that the language in an insurance endorsement required privity of contract with the insured party subcontractor to obtain additional insured status and denied coverage to others despite a provision in a subcontract requiring such additional insured coverage. In this case, an owner entered into a contract with a general contractor for construction services. The general contractor entered into a subcontract with a subcontractor. The subcontractor agreed to procure and maintain a CGL policy naming the owner, the general contractor, and another related party as additional insureds thereunder. An employee of the subcontractor was injured on the project and sued the three additional insureds and several other parties. Subcontractor’s insurance company refused to defend and indemnify any party other than the general contractor. All the parties sued by the subcontractor’s employee brought an action against the subcontractor’s insurance company, seeking coverage for defense and indemnification as additional insureds under the subcontractor’s CGL policy. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    Snooze You Lose? Enforcement of Notice and Timing Provisions

    November 11, 2024 —
    Deadlines are an inescapable part of the construction industry. Bid deadlines. Submittal deadlines. Material delivery deadlines. Substantial completion. Final completion. And so, inevitably, fighting about deadlines becomes a necessary byproduct. Was the deadline really a deadline? Was the schedule slippage on the critical path? Should there be an equitable extension to the date of substantial completion? Given the amount of attention and concern conferred on deadlines, those drafting construction contracts naturally seek to clarify which deadlines really matter with the inclusion of notice and timing provisions. A contract’s change order and claims procedures are often a key friction point for those drafting and administering the contract. Should there be a requirement for prior written notice of a claim for cost/time relief? How much advance notice? Who should the request be sent to? Is a specific form of notice required? What are the consequences of failing to provide timely notice? A practitioner should pay careful attention to negotiating these terms on the front end, because rest assured, these contract provisions will garner scrutiny when a change order dispute boils over. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cornelius F. "Lee" Banta, Jr., Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Banta may be contacted at lbanta@pecklaw.com

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    December 17, 2024 —
    Construction projects are inherently complex, and insurance coverage plays a crucial role in managing risks, especially when unforeseen issues arise. The case of Acuity v. Kinsale demonstrates the tangled web of insurance obligations, especially when multiple insurers provide coverage for a single event. This case, involving Monarch Stucco, Inc., Acuity, and Kinsale Insurance Company, sheds light on the challenges that contractors, subcontractors, and insurers may face when disputes over liability and coverage occur. The Background of the Case At the heart of this dispute lies a construction defect at a retirement community project in Lakewood, Colorado. Monarch Stucco, Inc. (“Monarch”), a subcontractor hired by GH Phipps Construction Company (“Phipps”), was responsible for stucco work on the project. Unfortunately, defects in the building’s envelope system, particularly Monarch’s stucco work, led to significant damage and costly repairs. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Oracle Sues Procore, Claims Theft of Trade Secrets for ERP Integration

    November 25, 2024 —
    Oracle, Inc., has sued Procore in federal court in Northern California, accusing the construction management platform provider of stealing confidential information related to developing enterprise resource planning products for contractors. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Yoders, ENR
    Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    December 03, 2024 —
    It is instructive to review the Supreme Court’s record in its most recent term, concentrating on regulatory and administrative law cases, which are usually back-burner issues. But not this term. The Supreme Court began the current term on October 7, 2024. The Court has already chosen many cases to review in the new term, and it promises to be as interesting as the 2023 term, which produced several significant rulings affecting regulatory and administrative law, chiefly the Loper Bright Enterprises ruling. Loper Bright overturned the Court’s landmark administrative law ruling of Chevron, USA v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). The Background to Loper Bright In 1984, the Supreme Court decided Chevron USA, Inc. v. National Resource Defense Council. (See 467 U.S. 839 (1984).) The unanimous decision, written by Justice Stevens, reversed then-D.C. Circuit Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s ruling that set aside EPA’s Clean Air Act “bubble policy,” which was intended to provide regulatory relief from certain EPA permitting requirements. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Suffolk Construction Drywall Suits Involve Claim for $3 Million in Court Costs

    November 11, 2024 —
    Suffolk Construction lost a breach-of-contract contract lawsuit in July with a former drywall subcontractor's surety—but the contractor's payout may dramatically increase if the presiding U.S. district court judge in Miami allows the surety to collect $3 million more in requested attorneys' fees and trial costs. Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story...