BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure expert witness Loveland Colorado Subterranean parking expert witness Loveland Colorado production housing expert witness Loveland Colorado high-rise construction expert witness Loveland Colorado concrete tilt-up expert witness Loveland Colorado custom home expert witness Loveland Colorado landscaping construction expert witness Loveland Colorado mid-rise construction expert witness Loveland Colorado tract home expert witness Loveland Colorado low-income housing expert witness Loveland Colorado condominium expert witness Loveland Colorado housing expert witness Loveland Colorado casino resort expert witness Loveland Colorado Medical building expert witness Loveland Colorado office building expert witness Loveland Colorado structural steel construction expert witness Loveland Colorado condominiums expert witness Loveland Colorado institutional building expert witness Loveland Colorado hospital construction expert witness Loveland Colorado custom homes expert witness Loveland Colorado townhome construction expert witness Loveland Colorado industrial building expert witness Loveland Colorado
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Loveland, Colorado

    Colorado Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 1161 has three significant components that effect construction defect litigation. The first is a right to remedy and notice provision (75 days written notice) The homeowner must give the builder a notice that describes the nature of the claimed construction defects, the location of the defects and a general description of the type of damages that are claimed. The second component is a limitation on the nature and type of damages that can be pursued and awarded in a construction defect case. The third is a limitation on the availability and amount of punitive damages ($250,000) under the provisions of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Loveland Colorado

    State license required for electrical, asbestos removal, plumbers, and pesticides trade; no state license for general contracting. Licensing may be required on a city or county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Northern Colorado
    Local # 0660
    PO Box 669
    Windsor, CO 80550
    http://www.hbanco.com

    Grand County Builders Association
    Local # 0654
    PO Box 185
    Granby, CO 80446
    http://www.grandcountybuildersassoc.com

    Home Builders Association of Colorado
    Local # 0600
    600 Grant St Ste 550
    Denver, CO 80203
    http://www.hbacolorado.com

    Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Denver
    Local # 0650
    9033 E Easter Pl Ste 200
    Centennial, CO 80112
    http://www.hbadenver.com

    Eagle Valley Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 0652
    PO Box 3550
    Eagle, CO 81631
    http://www.evhba.com

    Summit County Builders Association
    Local # 0688
    PO Box 2245
    Frisco, CO 80443
    http://www.summitcountybuilders.org

    Mountain to Mesa Home Builders Association
    Local # 0670
    PO Box 2719
    Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
    http://www.memhba.org


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Loveland Colorado

    A Homeowner’s Guide to Recovering After the Palisades Fire

    Insured Survives Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case

    Floating Cities May Be One Answer to Rising Sea Levels

    Verdict In Favor Of Insured Homeowner Reversed For Improper Jury Instructions

    Packard Condominiums Settled with Kosene & Kosene Residential

    A Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/30/23) – AI Predicts Home Prices, Construction’s Effect on the Economy, and Could Streamline Communications for Developers

    Successful KF Defense Results in Dismissal with Prejudice

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Tar Escaping From Roof

    Colorado Passes Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    Armor Up: Fortifying Your Business Against California Litigation

    Why Construction Tendering Needs Specialized Intelligence

    New Stormwater Climate Change Tool

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    Aarow Equipment v. Travelers- An Update

    White and Williams Celebrates 125th Anniversary

    The Great London Property Exodus Is in Reverse as Tenants Return

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

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

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    Architects Group Lowers U.S. Construction Forecast

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    Construction Project Bankruptcy Law

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    NTSB Sheds Light on Fatal Baltimore Work Zone Crash

    Cumulative Impact Claims and Definition by Certain Boards

    LA’s $1.2 Billion Graffiti Towers Put on Sale After Bankruptcy

    Ownership and Licensing in Design Agreements

    Maximizing Contractual Indemnity Rights: Components of an Effective Provision

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

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

    How Long Does a Civil Lawsuit Take?

    Become Familiar With Your CGL Policy Exclusions to Ensure You Are Covered: Wardcraft v. EMC.

    New Mandatory Bond Notice Forms in Florida

    Unravel the Facts Before Asserting FDUTPA and Tortious Interference Claims

    Defense Owed to Insured Subcontractor, but not to Additional Insured

    Municipal Ordinances Create Additional Opportunities for the Defense of Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    Waiving The Right to Arbitrate Under Federal Law

    The Coronavirus, Zoom Meetings and Now a CCPA Class Action

    United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in EEOC Subpoena Case

    Georgia Coal-to-Solar Pivot Shows the Way on Climate Regs

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    A Court-Side Seat – Case Law Update (February 2022)

    Retainage: What Contractors Need to Know and Helpful Strategies

    The “Colorado American Dream Act:” H.B. 25-1272’s Construction Defect Reforms

    SEC Climate Change Disclosure Letter Foreshadows Anticipated Regulatory Changes

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather
    Corporate Profile

    LOVELAND COLORADO CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from approximately 5000 construction defect and claims related expert designations, the Loveland, Colorado Construction Expert Directory provides a single point of reference for construction defect and claims related support to developers, risk managers, and construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides construction claims investigation and expert services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, general liability carriers, owners, as well as a variety of public entities. Utilizing captive resources which comprise construction cost and scheduling experts, registered design professionals, forensic engineers, certified professional estimators, the firm brings national experience and local capabilities to Loveland and the surrounding areas.

    Loveland Colorado OSHA expert witness constructionLoveland Colorado structural engineering expert witnessesLoveland Colorado slope failure expert witnessLoveland Colorado construction project management expert witnessLoveland Colorado civil engineer expert witnessLoveland Colorado roofing construction expertLoveland Colorado expert witness concrete failure
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Loveland, Colorado

    Massachusetts Construction Industry Continues to Wait While Prompt Payment Law Is Put to the Test

    March 31, 2026 —
    Earlier this month, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) heard argument in J.C. Cannistraro, LLC v. Columbia Construction Co. et al., a dispute concerning the state’s Prompt Payment Act (PPA). Although a decision has yet to be issued, it could potentially pose widespread implications for high-value private construction projects moving forward – and perhaps backwards. The PPA, G. L. c. 149, § 29E, enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2010, has become a keystone in the construction industry. It was enacted to address, in part, downstream cash flow issues that tend to pervade construction projects by mandating a series of strict guidelines for submitting, and responding to, payment applications for private projects valued over $3,000,000. Amongst these requirements are set timeframes to respond to an application, as well as what must be contained in an application rejection. Critically, if an owner or upper-tier contractor fails to fully comply with all the statutory requirements in response to a proper payment application, the application is automatically “deemed to be approved” and payable. Significantly, however, this is not always the end of the line. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Catherine Maronski, Robinson Cole
    Ms. Maronski may be contacted at cmaronski@rc.com

    A Win for Clarity: What a Recent Federal Court Decision Means for Davis-Bacon Compliance

    July 13, 2026 —
    Following the Department of Labor’s 2023 Davis-Bacon rule changes, federal construction contractors faced a pressing question: not whether paying prevailing wages is required, but how far those obligations could extend. Could they reach off-site material suppliers? Delivery drivers? Contracts that omitted Davis-Bacon clauses entirely? A recent federal court decision in AGC of America v. US Department of Labor answers these questions in important ways, vacating several disputed provisions and giving contractors greater certainty when pricing, bidding, and administering federal construction projects. The ruling addresses three aspects of the 2023 regulations that sought to extend Davis-Bacon obligations beyond their traditional scope. By vacating those provisions, the decision creates a more predictable compliance environment and reinforces an important principle: Davis-Bacon enforcement works best when contractors, workers, and regulators operate under clear, objective rules. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen E. Irving, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Irving may be contacted at sirving@pecklaw.com

    Project Labor Agreements: A New Bid Protest Forum Split

    May 14, 2026 —
    Advertisements often include a disclaimer: “individual results may vary.” Similarly, lawyers are notorious for saying “it depends.” The mandatory Project Labor Agreement (“PLA”) regulations have recently placed into context this adage as it applies to federal contract bid protests, with very different results depending on which forum – the Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) versus the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) – different contractors have selected to bring PLA bid protests. Over the last two years, over 30 protesters have successfully achieved removal of mandatory PLAs from large-scale federal construction contracts based on two landmark bid protest decisions issued by the COFC. Similar challenges to PLAs at the GAO, however, have not been successful in removing PLAs, highlighting an emerging trend that the COFC is often a more effective relief forum than GAO for government construction contractors. Reprinted courtesy of Dirk D. Haire, Burr & Forman LLP, David P.J. Timm, Burr & Forman LLP and Michael J. Brewer, Burr & Forman LLP Mr. Haire may be contacted at dhaire@burr.com Mr. Timm may be contacted at dtimm@burr.com Mr. Brewer may be contacted at mbrewer@burr.com Read the full story...

    For Urban Walkers, a Patchy Dilemma: Who Owns the Sidewalk?

    July 06, 2026 —
    In 2007, New York City’s sanitation department threatened Natalie Shea with a $300 fine for defacing public property with graffiti. Her crime: drawing a blue flower in front of her family’s Park Slope home with sidewalk chalk. She was six years old. The incident, which made local and national news at the time, captures the fraught role that sidewalks often play in US cities. These patches of pavement do more than carry pedestrians to their destinations: They’re also places for commerce, social interaction and childhood play, from chalking to learning how to ride a bike. Urbanist Jane Jacobs once likened the range of activities that city sidewalks attract to an “intricate ballet.” In the new book Sidewalk Nation: The Life and Law of America’s Most Overlooked Resource (Harvard University Press), author Michael Pollack explores the “tangled web of state and local regulation” that governs sidewalks, with cities often passing along responsibilities for tasks like clearing snow and keeping walkways safe. He paints a portrait of the American sidewalk a disorderly and often neglected network, filled with literal and metaphorical cracks that give rise to all sorts of conflict, from mundane clashes over maintenance to more consequential fights over accessibility and inequality. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Poon, Bloomberg

    HHMR Honored as a 2026 Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work Recipient

    March 10, 2026 —
    We are pleased to share that Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell has been named a 2026 Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work honoree, a recognition grounded entirely in direct feedback from our own team members. The Denver Business Journal Best Places to Work program, in partnership with Quantum Workplace, ranks organizations based on anonymous employee engagement survey results that measure culture, leadership, communication, trust, team dynamics, and satisfaction. This year’s list includes 65 companies across the Denver metropolitan area, judged by the people who know these workplaces best: their employees. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Protect Your Projects By Identifying and Controlling Hidden Contract Risks

    March 10, 2026 —
    In a recent webinar entitled “Spreading the Risk and Avoiding Killer Contract Clauses,” Phelps lawyers Daniel Lund and Larry Borda examined contractual provisions that most often expose construction professionals to unexpected financial and legal risk. While construction contracts may appear routine, each contract serves as the primary mechanism for managing, allocating, and mitigating risk among parties involved in complex projects—often valued in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. When parties fail to fully understand the terms they sign, costly and avoidable consequences frequently follow. Contracts as Risk-Transfer Instruments Construction contracts are the primary method for transferring risk. While contracts authorize work and define scope, they also allocate responsibility for the risks inherent in construction projects. Some may imagine a world where a one-page agreement and a set of plans would suffice. In reality, modern construction requires detailed agreements—particularly provisions designed to anticipate problems, distribute burdens and reduce disputes. Reprinted courtesy of Larry Borda, Phelps and Daniel Lund III, Phelps Mr. Borda may be contacted at larry.borda@phelps.com Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com Read the full story...

    Engineering Seals Versus Contracts ‘Under Seal’ (Two Very Different Things)

    May 05, 2026 —
    Recently, I was asked by a reader to explain the difference between a document that is ‘sealed’ by an engineer (or architect) and one that is signed ‘under seal’. This question prompted this post, as others may also be wondering about the distinction. [Hi Ed! Thanks for your question] Professionals have ‘seals’ that show that they are registered (Engineers) or licensed (Architects). As most of you likely know, your professional seal is something that is hard won and which is used when—and only when—your plans were made by you or someone under your direct supervisory control. Your signature represents that you were in responsible control over the documents, and that they have met the required professional standard of care. (21 NC Admin Code 2-0206 (a)(11)). Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Construction Liens: Liening for Amounts Not Yet Technically Due Does Not Mean Lien Is Fraudulent

    August 11, 2026 —
    A 2024 bankruptcy ruling, In re Edgewater Construction Group, Inc., 657 B.R. 668 (S.D.Fla. 2024), touched upon an interesting issue when it comes to construction liens. Is a construction lien fraudulent simply because the lien includes amounts not yet due? Not necessarily. In this bankruptcy dispute, the subcontractor debtor (that filed for bankruptcy) recorded two construction liens on projects. The general contractor argued in the bankruptcy court that the subcontractor debtor’s liens were fraudulent. As to the first lien, the general contractor argued that the lien was fraudulent because it included amounts that the debtor knew the general contractor had already paid to the debtor’s subcontractors/suppliers. The bankruptcy court disagreed: “The Court finds that, although the Debtor had been told that [the general contractor] had paid these subcontractors, in light of the ongoing dispute between Debtor and [the general contractor], it was reasonable for the Debtor to demand proof. Debtor’s subsequent filing of a partial satisfaction of lien once the Debtor received the requested proof of payment from [the general contractor] counters any claim of willful exaggeration.” In re Edgewater Construction Group, supra, at 672-673. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com