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

    Tennessee Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB 2787/SB2931 & HB 2771/SB 2201; Title 66, Chptr 36) Homeowners must serve written notice of a defect 15 days after its discovery; Contractors, upon receipt of the notice, have 10 business days to inspect the residence and inform any subcontractors it believes are reasonably responsible on the defect. Within 10 business days after notice of the claim, the subcontractor must serve a written response to contractor. Within 30 days after receipt of notice of a defect, the contractor must provide written notice of intention (repair, replace, monetarily compensate or reject) to the homeowner.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Huntingdon Tennessee

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Greater Knoxville
    Local # 4455
    221 Clark St
    Knoxville, TN 37921
    http://www.hbaknoxville.com

    Home Builders Association of Middle Tennessee
    Local # 4477
    9007 Overlook Blvd Suite 201
    Brentwood, TN 37027
    http://www.hbamt.net/

    Home Builders Association of Cumberland Co
    Local # 4410
    PO Box 507
    Crossville, TN 38557
    http://www.cumberlandcountyhomebuilders.com

    Home Builders Association of Dyer Co
    Local # 4425
    1075 Cooper Dr
    Dyersburg, TN 38024


    Home Builders Association of Rutherford Cty
    Local # 4490
    730-A Middle Tennessee Blvd Suite 5
    Murfreesboro, TN 37129
    http://www.rchba.info/

    Home Builders Association of Sevier Co
    Local # 4486
    PO Box 4653
    Sevierville, TN 37864
    http://www.seviercountyhba.com

    Home Builders Association of Upper Cumberland
    Local # 4491
    PO Box 243
    Cookeville, TN 38503
    http://www.uchba.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Huntingdon Tennessee

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Hilton Grand Vacations Defect Trial Delayed

    Are Construction Defects Covered by Your General Liability Policy?

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole

    Lower Court “Eminently Reasonable” but Wrong in Construction Defect Case

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Joinder vs. Misjoinder in Colorado Construction Claims: Roche Constructors v. One Beacon

    Delaware “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6)

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Local Government Waives Construction Fees to Spur Jobs

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Florida County Suspends Impact Fees to Spur Development

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Death of Construction Defect Lawyer Ruled a Suicide

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    Recent Case Brings Clarity and Questions to Statute of Repose Application

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Increased Expenditure on Injuries for New York City School Construction

    California Bill Would Notify Homeowners on Construction Defect Options

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Appropriation Bill Cuts Military Construction Spending

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    Changes To Indemnification Statute Are Here! Say Hello To Defense Duties

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    Oregon agreement to procure insurance, anti-indemnity statute, and self-insured retention

    Seller Cannot Compel Arbitration for Its Role in Construction Defect Case<

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Safe Harbors- not just for Sailors anymore (or, why advance planning can prevent claims of defective plans & specs) (law note)

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Limitations of Liability in Subcontractors’ Contracts May Not Be Enforceable in Colorado to Limit Claims by Construction Professionals.

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

    Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment in Landis v. Fannin Builders

    Condo Owners Worried Despite Settlement

    Exclusion Bars Coverage for Mold, Fungus

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Construction Defect Exception Does Not Lift Bar in Payment Dispute

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Construction Spending Dropped in July

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    Judge Rejects Extrapolation, Harmon Tower to Remain Standing

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    David McLain to Speak at the CDLA 2012 Annual Conference

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement
    Corporate Profile

    HUNTINGDON TENNESSEE CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Huntingdon, Tennessee Construction Expert Witness 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.

    Huntingdon Tennessee forensic architect architectural expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect multi family design expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect testifying construction expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect construction expertsHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect construction code expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect building code compliance expert witnessHuntingdon Tennessee forensic architect ada design expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Huntingdon, Tennessee

    Water Is the Enemy

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    So says Melissa Mitchell, writing in the blog of Community Association Consultants. She cites the nightmare scenario of “an unseen presence lurking behind the walls.” Not a horror movie, but water intrusion, which she notes can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage. Eric Hoff, of Western Architectural, is quoted that “it only takes a hole one-eighth inch diameter in a building’s exterior to allow the intrusion of 35 gallons of water over twelve months.” Destructive testing on a building in in the Pacific Northwest revealed that water intrusion had lead to structural failure of the building. The wet wood had made a home for carpenter ants. Repairs exceeded $100,000.

    Mitchell notes that “deferred maintenance can be costly” and cites the importance of preventative maintenance or the development of a maintenance plan. She concludes that “if you own or are responsible for maintaining a condominium complex, apartment building or commercial structure, it’s simply good business sense to have a building envelope assessment conducted by experts in the field.”

    Read the full story…


    Lawsuit over Construction Defects Not a Federal Case

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The United State District Court in California has dismissed the claims of a contractor against the United States government, on the grounds that it was not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the court. The origins of the case are in a related construction defect claim. The current plaintiff, Performance Contracting, Inc., did the lath and plaster work for a building for the Department of Veterans Affairs. After the building was completed, the Veterans Affairs complained to the general contractor, Wynema, Inc., of water intrusion problems.

    Wyema and Performance conducted testing and the water intrusion was found to be due to “a variety of design defects and omissions, including: 1) omission of proper window flashing; 2) inadequate waterproof membrane around the windows; 3) inadequate T-molding around the windows; 4) lack of a window sill pan for the windows; 5) lack of any backing in the window framing; 6) lack of any backing for the stucco expansion joints and seams; and 7) failure to require that a performance mock-up of the window assembly and adjacent areas be built and water tested.” Wyema filed a construction defect action against Performance and other subcontractors.

    In the current case, Performance claims that Veteran Affairs was negligent, that it “breached its duty to Plaintiff when it provided deficient plants and specifications” and “failed to properly oversee construction and inspect Project work.” The court determined that it could not hear this case, noting that “Federal Courts are presumptively without jurisdiction over civil actions.”

    Performance raised its claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The judge was not persuaded by this claim, noting that the FTCA does not apply to purported breach of the General Contract. The FTCA waives the government’s sovereign immunity in cases of “injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.”

    Performance was unable to pursue its claims in the Court of Federal Claims as there was no contract between Performance and the government. However, the court noted that Performance’s inability to file suit in the Court of Federal Claims does not open up a path to the District Court. “Litigants are not guaranteed a forum in which to sue the United States.” The court further noted that “if this Court were to accept Plaintiff’s logic, non-parties to contracts, but not parties, would be free to pursue contract claims in the fora of their choosing.”

    Read the court’s decision…


    California insured’s duty to cooperate and insurer’s right to select defense counsel

    April 14, 2011 — April 14, 2011 - CDCoverage.com

    In Travelers Property Casualty Co. v. Centex Homes, No. C 10-02757 (N.D. Cal. April 1, 2011), general contractor Centex was sued by homeowners for construction defects. Centex tendered its defense to Travelers as an additional insured under policies issued by Travelers to two Centex subcontractors. Travelers agreed to defend Centex under a reservation of rights and selected defense counsel to defend Centex. Centex refused to accept the defense, asserting that it was entitled to select defense counsel. Travelers filed suit against Centex seeking a declaratory judgment that Centex had breached the duty to cooperate condition in the Travelers’ policy.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    August 17, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Coverage was denied under the policy’s condominium exclusion in California Traditions, Inc. v. Claremont Liability Ins. Co.,2011 Cal. App.LEXIS912 (Cal. Ct. App., ordered published July 11, 2011).

    California Traditions was the developer and general contractor for a housing development. California Traditions subcontracted with Ja-Con to perform the rough framing work for 30 residential units. The project had 146 separate residences that were freestanding with no shared walls, roof, halls, or plumbing or electrical lines. To allow a higher density development, the project was developed, marketed and sold as condominiums.

    The purchaser of one of the units filed a complaint against California Traditions alleging property damage from the defective construction. California Traditions cross-complained against Ja-Con.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    October 31, 2010 — Original article by Michael Bradford in Business Insurance

    ATLANTA—Negligent construction that results in damage to surrounding property constitutes an occurrence under a commercial general liability policy, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled.

    In a 6-1 opinion Monday in American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Co. Inc. vs. Hathaway Development Co. Inc., the Georgia high court upheld a lower court ruling that the general contractor’s claim for damage caused by a subcontractor’s faulty plumbing work was covered.

    The ruling on construction defects is the latest in number of such cases across the United States

    Read Full Story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Bradford of Business Insurance.


    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The blog Stucco & Insulation Contractor writes up some details on a “relatively new modification to modern Exterior Insulation Finish Systems,” known as “geometrically defined insulation boards.” They note that the insulation has grooves cut in the back to provide a route for water to drain, instead of getting trapped. They note that when EIFS is installed by a skilled applicator, this is unnecessary. However, with less experienced (and cheaper) installers, problems are more likely.

    By cutting these channels, the application of EIFS is rendered “idiot proof,” as they note. Their preference would be that EIFS installers take the time to do the job right, but call this “a step in the right direction.”

    Read the full story…


    United States District Court Confirms That Insurers Can Be Held Liable Under The CCPA.

    June 19, 2012 — Chad Johnson

    In D.R. Horton, Inc.-Denver v. The Travelers Indem. Co. of Am., 10-CV-02826-WJM-KMT, 2012 WL 527204 (D. Colo. Feb. 16, 2012), the court was asked to rule on Travelers’[1] motion to dismiss D.R. Horton, Inc. ?Äì Denver’s (“DRH”) claim that Travelers violated the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”).

    In the underlying construction defect case (“CD case”), DRH, as the developer and general contractor of a construction project, tendered the defense of the CD case to certain subcontractors and to Travelers as an insurer to those subcontractors. Travelers accepted the duty to defend DRH. DRH hired counsel to defend it, and the attorney fees and costs of suit were billed to Travelers. However, for a period of over five years, Travelers failed to actually pay any portion of the defense of DRH. Finally, on October 31, 2008, Travelers offered checks for payment of only 4% of the costs and fees incurred. DRH then returned the checks to Travelers and provided Travelers with authority to support its position that the amounts in Travelers’ checks were inadequate. Thereafter, Travelers dug its heels in, and resubmitted the same checks.

    DRH was then forced to file a coverage action against Travelers for declaratory judgment, breach of contract, bad faith breach of insurance contract, and deceptive trade practices under the CCPA. In its motion to dismiss DRH’s CCPA claim, Travelers’ argued that DRH failed to plead specific facts that Travelers engaged in a deceptive trade practice under C.R.S. § 6-1-105, and DRH failed to plead sufficient facts showing that Travelers’ actions significantly affect the public ?Äì a necessary element of a CCPA claim.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Chad Johnson, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Johnson can be contacted at johnson@hhmrlaw.com


    Ohio Adopts Energy-Efficient Building Code

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    In a compromise between environmental groups, who were looking for stricter standards, and homebuilders, who were trying to contain building costs, the state of Ohio has adopted buildings codes that will increase the energy efficiency of new homes. The estimated costs are about $1,100 with estimated annual savings of $230. According to Corey Roblee of the International Code Council, “It’s something needed in the state of Ohio.”

    The Ohio Home Builders Association opposed a proposal to adopt the guidelines of the International Code Council. Builders will be able to either follow the ICC guidelines or they can use the Ohio guidelines to meet the same energy efficiency. Vincent Squillace, the executive vice president of the OHBA, said, “We came up with an equivalent code that’s more strict but is about $2,000 cheaper per home to implement than the original code.”

    The new code will require that at least 75% of lighting must be high efficiency, increases the degree of insulation, and specifies more efficient windows, among other changes.

    Read the full story…


    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    August 11, 2011 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    A general contractor was entitled to a defense as an additional insured when the underlying complaint did not allege it was solely negligent. A-1 Roofing Co. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 656 (Ill. Ct. App. June 24, 2011).

    A-1 was the general contractor for a roof resurfacing job at a high school. Jack Frost Iron Works Inc. (“Frost”) was one of A-1’s subcontractors. Frost had a CGL policy with Navigators Insurance Company under which A-1 was an additional insured.

    An employee of Frost’s subcontractor Midwest Sheet Metal Inc. was killed at the job site when a boom-lift he was operating flipped over. The boom-lift had been leased by another Frost subcontractor, Bakes Steel Erectors, Inc. (BSE). The deceased's estate filed suit against A-1, BSE and two other defendants.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com


    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    It’s been a while since I discussed the importance of safety. But, a recent article on ENR.com compelled this brief article. Don’t shortcut safety — you could be facing serious criminal repercussions.

    A New York crane company owner and one of his employees are each facing a second-degree manslaughter charge for the death of two construction workers.  The charges stem from the collapse of a crane in New York City. The district attorney determined that the crane owner cut a few corners to reduce its operation costs, significantly sacrificing safety.

    Another example was the 2010 trial of another New York crane operator who was charged with manslaughter. In that case, the criminal charges failed to stick, but an administrative judge found that the contractor used a damaged sling to support the steel collar binding the tower-crane mast to the 18th floor of a high-rise building being constructed. The company also used four slings instead of the eight, as specified by the crane manufacturer; improperly attached the slings and failed to pad or soften them.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After suing a contractor for failing to complete the remodeling of their home, an Orange County couple has settled for an apology. Douglas J. Pettibone represented the contractor, who had lost his business after a broken neck, multiple surgeries, and an addiction to pain medicine. Mr. Pettibone represented his client pro bone. The case was settled in arbitration by JAMS.

    Mr. Pettibone noted that his client gave “a heartfelt and very moving apology.” The remodeling was completed by another contractor, two years after Thorp Construction stopped work on the project. After the apology, the case was dismissed.

    Read the full story…


    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    February 10, 2012 — CJD Staff

    Built on a program for safer school buildings, schools in Neenan County, Colorado have been shown to have mild-to-moderate structural problems, rendering some of them unsafe. The Denver Post reports that a third-party review of schools built by the Neenan Company has shown structural issues in all fifteen school buildings.

    One school, Meeker Elementary, has been closed as it could collapse under high winds or during an earthquake. Sargent Junior-Senior High School is in use, but there are plans to evacuate the buildings if winds exceed 25 mile per hour. Two schools have roofs that are unable to bear expected loads of snow during the winter.

    The Neenan Company says that the school buildings are not up to their standards and is working with the school districts to repair the buildings. Repairs are expected to be complete by August.

    Read the full story…


    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California construction industry sees Senate Bill 863 as a needed help to legitimate construction businesses. The bill introduces regulations that will help shut down fraudulent contractors and help reduce workers’ compensation fraud. John Upshaw of the Independent Roofing Contractors of California described the revenue lost to California and other states as “phenomenal,” saying that “we need to continue the coordinated efforts if we are to see true workers’ compensation reform.”

    Read the full story…


    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    January 1, 2011 — February 08, 2011 CDJ Staff

    “Challenges for Experts in Construction Defect Claims and Litigation” will be held Thursday May 13, 2011 between 1:30 and 3:00 PM at this year’s West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Among the various topics covered will be of Right to Repair/Opportunity to Repair statutes, improper testing methodologies, new challenges where a case involves a Wrap Policy, OCIPS, CCIPS, and other owner controlled insurance programs, as well as the need for realistic testing protocols for the party the expert is retained to represent.

    During the presentation Mr. MacGregor will be working in connection with a group of construction and design experts each of which have extensive experience with construction defect and claims related litigation. This particular session is expected to attract a standing-room only crowd, drawing in excess of 1700 attendees.

    The West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar is the largest seminar of its type. This year’s event is scheduled for will take place on May 12 and 13, 2011, at The Disneyland Hotel and Resort. For more information regarding the years event please visit http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322

    http://www.westcoastcasualty.com/dyncat.cfm?catid=3322

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    December 9, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    Recently, I read an article on Engineering News-Record that outlines a remarkable movement by as many as four states, to mandate coverage of construction defects in contractor general liability insurance policies. Say what? Is this a reality? What will become of affordable insurance?

    Commercial General Liability insurance, or CGL, is your basic liability insurance. Every contractor doing business in the State of Washington, and most likely those abroad, has this insurance. Contractors buy this insurance to protect them from unforeseen liabilities arising from their negligence - and right now it’s reasonably affordable.

    Why is it so affordable in such a risk-heavy industry? Because CGL policies significantly limit the scope of their coverage. Coverage is generally afforded for damages resulting from negligence (The roofer put a hammer through the drywall contractor’s wall) or which resulted from your defective construction (the roof leaked and flooded the rest of the house). But, that coverage does not include replacement of your faulty construction (the contents of the home might be protected by your leaky roof - the leaky roof itself is not).

    The debate over coverage typically stems from the definition of “occurrence,” a term used to describe the event from which coverage arises, “resulting loss,” a term used to describe the type of loss covered.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com


    Contractor Burns Down Home, Insurer Refuses Coverage

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    InsuranceStep reports that a Connecticut insurance company has rejected a claim over a fire in a remodeling project that killed five people. Utica First Insurance states that the coverage was invalid as the insured, Tiberias Construction, had misrepresented information about the company and the work performed in applying for insurance. During a remodel, the contractor allegedly placed fireplace ashes near trash. The trash ignited, leading to the house fire.

    Read the full story…


    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    November 7, 2012 — David McLain, Colorado Construction Litigation

    The following is an update on our December 20, 2010 article regarding United States Fire Insurance Company v. Pinkard Construction Company, Civil Action No. 09-CV-01854-MSK-MJW, and its underlying dispute, Legacy Apartments v. Pinkard Construction Company, Case No. 2003 CV 703, Boulder County Dist. Ct. That article can be found here.

    The present action, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., et al. v. The North River Insurance Co., et al., Civil Action No. 10-CV-02936-MSK-CBS, encompasses the coverage battle that ensued between Pinkard’s insurers, Travelers Indemnity Company of America (“Travelers”) and United States Fire Insurance Company (“USFI”), following the settlement of Legacy’s construction defect claims against Pinkard. A short history of the underlying facts is as follows:

    In 1995, Pinkard constructed the Legacy Apartments housing complex in Longmont, Colorado. Following construction, Legacy notified Pinkard of water leaks associated with various elements of construction. Legacy ultimately filed suit against Pinkard in 2003, and would go on to clarify and amend its defect claims in 2004, 2006, and again in 2008. Following Pinkard’s notification of Legacy’s claims, USFI provided a defense to Pinkard, but Travelers refused to do so, on the purported basis that Legacy’s allegations did not implicate property damage under the terms of Travelers’ policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. McLain can be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com


    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A twenty-eighth person has plead guilty in the ongoing Las Vegas HOA scandal. Dax Louderman, who had been a construction company manager had acknowledged that he stole more than $495,000 from his former employers, Alpha 1 Construction and the Stone Canyon Homeowners Association, and further that he did not report this improper income on his tax returns. He has agreed to work with prosecutors and to pay $134,860 to the IRS. His actual sentencing will happen on June 24.

    Read the full story…