• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom home expert witness Ashburn Virginia institutional building expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominiums expert witness Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia hospital construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia condominium expert witness Ashburn Virginia townhome construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia tract home expert witness Ashburn Virginia custom homes expert witness Ashburn Virginia low-income housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia multi family housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia retail construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia parking structure expert witness Ashburn Virginia industrial building expert witness Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up expert witness Ashburn Virginia casino resort expert witness Ashburn Virginia production housing expert witness Ashburn Virginia Medical building expert witness Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction expert witness Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking expert witness Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia construction cost estimating expert witnessAshburn Virginia stucco expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witnesses fenestrationAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnessAshburn Virginia building code compliance expert witnessAshburn Virginia architectural engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia delay claim expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer Builders Information
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ashburn Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northern Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4840
    3901 Centerview Dr Suite E
    Chantilly, VA 20151

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    The Top of Virginia Builders Association
    Local # 4883
    1182 Martinsburg Pike
    Winchester, VA 22603

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Shenandoah Valley Builders Association
    Local # 4848
    PO Box 1286
    Harrisonburg, VA 22803

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Piedmont Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4890
    PO Box 897
    Culpeper, VA 22701

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Fredericksburg Area Builders Association
    Local # 4830
    3006 Lafayette Blvd
    Fredericksburg, VA 22408

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Augusta Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 4804
    PO Box 36
    Waynesboro, VA 22980

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
    Local # 4809
    PO Box 7743
    Charlottesville, VA 22906

    Ashburn Virginia Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Ashburn Virginia

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    Rise in Home Building Helps Other Job Sectors

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    How to Make the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Subcontractor Has No Duty to Defend Under Indemnity Provision

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    Wake County Justice Center- a LEED Silver Project done right!

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    London Shard Developer Wins Approval for Tower Nearby

    Man Pleads Guilty in Construction Kickback Scheme

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    How California’s Construction Industry has dealt with the New Indemnity Law

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    Arizona Supreme Court Holds a Credit Bid at a Trustee’s Sale Should Not be Credited to a Title Insurer Under a Standard Lender’s Title Policy To the Extent the Bid Exceeds the Collateral’s Fair Market Value

    City of Birmingham Countersues Contractor for Incomplete Work

    Miller Law Firm Helped HOA Recover for Construction Defects without Filing a Lawsuit

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Action Violation

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute

    Housing Starts in U.S. Slumped More Than Forecast in March

    Cleveland Condo Board Says Construction Defects Caused Leaks

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Whether Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is an Occurrence Creates Ambiguity

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

    CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

    Stadium Intended for the 2010 World Cup Still Not Ready

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    Year and a Half Old Las Vegas VA Emergency Room Gets Rebuilt

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    Arizona Court of Appeals Awards Attorneys’ Fees in Quiet-Title Action

    Property Damage, Occurrences, Delays, Offsets and Fees. California Decision is a Smorgasbord of Construction Insurance Issues

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Happenings in and around the 2016 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Domtar Update

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Catch 22: “If You’re Moving Dirt, You Need to Control Your Dust” (But Don’t Use Potable Water!)

    Boston Water Main Break Floods Trench and Kills Two Workers

    BHA at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute, Orlando

    Administration Seeks To Build New FBI HQ on Current D.C. Site

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    Increases in U.S. Office Rents Led by San Jose and Dallas
    Corporate Profile


    The Ashburn, Virginia Expert Witness Engineer Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 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 Ashburn'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.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    January 10, 2018 —

    Binding arbitration is an alternative to litigation. Instead of having your dispute decided by a judge and/or jury, it is decided by an arbitrator through an arbitration process. Arbitration, however, is a creature of contract, meaning there needs to be a contractual arbitration provision requiring the parties to arbitrate, and not litigate, their dispute. Just like litigation, there are pros and cons to the arbitration process, oftentimes dictated by the specific facts and legal issues in the case.

    What happens when a person executes two (or more) contemporaneous contracts, one with an arbitration provision and one without? Are the parties required to arbitrate the dispute arising out of the contract that does not contain the arbitration provision?

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    December 01, 2017 —
    A California Court of Appeal has confirmed that additional insured endorsements (“AIE”) granting coverage for liability arising out of a named insured’s “ongoing operations,” and in effect during those “ongoing operations,” do not require that the liability arise while the named insured is performing work. McMillin Mgmt. Servs., L.P. v. Financial Pacific Ins. Co., Cal. Ct. App., November 14, 2017, Case No. D069814. In McMillin, a construction defect insurance coverage action, Lexington Insurance Company argued that McMillin had no liability to homeowners until after their homes closed escrow; thus, McMillin did not face liability while the named insureds’ work was ongoing. The Court of Appeal rejected Lexington’s argument, finding that the “ongoing operations” AIEs provide only that McMillin’s liability “be ‘linked’ through a ‘minimal causal connection or incidental relationship’ with [the named insureds’] ongoing operations.” (internal citations omitted). The Court reasoned that Lexington had not established that all of the damage in the underlying action occurred after the named insureds completed their work, thus Lexington had not established as a matter of law that there was no potential for coverage for McMillin under the policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin C. Brantley, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Brantley may be contacted at

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    November 21, 2017 —
    Originally published by CDJ on June 5, 2017 Background In Gillotti v. Stewart (April 26, 2017) 2017 WL 1488711, which was ordered to be published on May 18, 2017, the defendant grading subcontractor added soil over tree roots to level the driveway on the plaintiff homeowner’s sloped lot. The homeowner sued the grading subcontractor under the California Right to Repair Act (Civil Code §§ 895, et seq.) claiming that the subcontractor’s work damaged the trees. After the jury found the subcontractor was not negligent, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the subcontractor. The homeowner appealed, arguing that the trial court improperly construed the Right to Repair Act as barring a common law negligence theory against the subcontractor and erred in failing to follow Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98. The Third District Court of Appeal disagreed and affirmed the trial court’s judgment in favor of the subcontractor. Impact This is the second time the Third District Court of Appeal has held that Liberty Mutual (discussed below) was wrongly decided and held that the Right to Repair Act is the exclusive remedy for construction defect claims. The decision follows its holding in Elliott Homes, Inc. v. Superior Court (Hicks) (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 333, in which the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act’s pre-litigation procedures apply when homeowners plead construction defect claims based on common law causes of action, as opposed to violations of the building standards set forth in the Right to Repair Act. Elliott is currently on hold at the California Supreme Court, pending the decision in McMillin Albany, LLC v. Superior Court (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 1132, wherein Liberty Mutual was rejected for the first time by the Fifth District. CGDRB continues to follow developments regarding the much anticipated McMillin decision closely, as well as all related matters. Reprinted courtesy of Richard H. Glucksman, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger and Chelsea L. Zwart, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at Ms. Zwart may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    April 11, 2018 —
    Yesterday, the Herald reported that six schools and a nursery have been affected by construction defects in Edinburg. For every eight properties inspected by council, one was found to share analogous issues which caused “a wall to collapse at a city primary school in 2016.” Furthermore, over the course of eighteen months, inspectors will observe more buildings across Edinburg in order to guarantee their “structural safety.” At Oxgangs Primary School, during Storm Gertrude in January 2016, nine tons of masonry fell from the side of a building. The Herald reported 17 other schools across Edinburg closed due to safety concerns. All schools closed were part of the “same private finance initiative.” Moreover, there have been 20 other examples of defects found that are alike, in which checks were “carried out at public buildings.” Christine Jardine, a Scottish Liberal democrat who represents Edinburg West, states that the findings were “scandalous,” and “simply not good enough.” In addition, Jardine points out that the council is responsible for buildings to meet the highest of standards, and proper checks are necessary, in order to ensure the safety of their children. Lastly, Jardine suggests that the Scottish government should no longer rely on the funding from local authority. Instead, she proposes that the government must be accountable for “improving council funding.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Burden of Proof Under All-Risk Property Insurance Policy

    January 31, 2018 —

    A recent Florida case, Jones v. Federated National Ins. Co., 43 Fla. L. Weekly D164a (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) discusses the burden of proof of an insured in establishing coverage under an all-risk property insurance policy. Getting right to this critical point, the court explained the burden of proof as follows:

    1. The insured has the initial burden of proof to establish that the damage at issue occurred during a period in which the damaged property had insurance coverage. If the insured fails to meet this burden, judgment shall be entered in favor of the insurer.

    2. If the insured’s initial burden is met, the burden of proof shifts to the insurer to establish that (a) there was a sole cause of the loss, or (b) in cases where there was more than one cause, there was an “efficient proximate cause” of the loss.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim

    March 14, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Ctr. For Excellence in Higher Ed., Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25424 (D. Col. Feb. 16, 2018), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado had occasion to consider whether a breach of contract claim could qualify for coverage under a general liability policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    December 20, 2017 —
    The Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's determination that the seller's alleged negligent misrepresentation regarding the propensity of the property to flood was covered. Erie Ins. Exh. v. Maxwell, 2017 Tenn. App. LEXIS 746 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2017). The Chapmans purchased a residence from the Maxwells on March 7, 2014. Prior to the sale, the Maxwells completed a residential property disclosure in which they allegedly misrepresented the propensity of the property to flood. Five months after the purchase, the residence sustained damage as a result of two floods within three days. The Chapmans sued, alleging they relied on the Maxwells' representations regarding the propensity of the property to flood. The Chapmans further alleged that they sustained property damage as a result of the Maxwells' negligence and negligent misrepresentations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Making Construction Innovation Stick

    February 22, 2018 —
    Integrating innovations into construction workflows—rather than serially testing, piloting and discarding them—is a definition of success. Yet few innovations—even ones that shine in trials—are absorbed into practice. Many just quietly go away, sending the work of vetting and testing them down the drain. That leaves some firms wondering if most construction technology innovation efforts are a waste of time. Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record authors Tom Sawyer, Jeff Rubenstone and Scott Lewis Mr. Sawyer may be contacted at Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at Mr. Lewis may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of