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

    Indiana Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to SB45160, §IC 32-27-3-1&2 a claimant must provide written notice 60 days before filing an action. Within 21 days after service of the notice, the construction professional must serve a written response. Claimant must file list of known construction defects, description, and the construction professional responsible for each alleged defect (to the extent known).


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Wabash County Indiana

    License required for plumbing. All other licensing is done at the local county level.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders Association of Howard County Inc
    Local # 1532
    PO Box 1187
    Kokomo, IN 46903
    http://www.hbahowardco.com

    Builders Association of Greater Lafayette
    Local # 1548
    PO Box 5795
    Lafayette, IN 47903
    http://www.bagl.info

    Home Builders Association of Fort Wayne
    Local # 1528
    305 W Main St
    Fort Wayne, IN 46802
    http://www.hbafortwayne.com

    East Central Indiana Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1556
    PO Box 1072
    Muncie, IN 47308


    Jasper County Home Builders Association
    Local # 1550
    511 4th Ave. NW
    Demotte, IN 46310
    http://www.jaspercountyhba.com

    Builders Association of Kosciusko-Fulton Counties
    Local # 1541
    313 S Buffalo St Suite B
    Warsaw, IN 46580
    http://www.bakfc.com

    Marshall Co Chapter
    Local # 1554
    PO Box 464
    Plymouth, IN 46563



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Wabash County Indiana

    Federal District Court Predicts Florida Will Adopt Injury In Fact Trigger

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Supreme Court of Oregon Affirms Decision in Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, et al.

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

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Plans Go High Tech

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    Hawaii Building Codes to Stay in State Control

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Tampa Condo Owners Allege Defects

    General Contractor/Developer May Not Rely on the Homeowner Protection Act to Avoid a Waiver of Consequential Damages in an AIA Contract

    The Colorado Court of Appeals Rules that a Statutory Notice of Claim Triggers an Insurer’s Duty to Defend.

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

    Insurer Not Liable for Construction Defect Revealed by Woodpecker

    Florida trigger

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    After $15 Million Settlement, Association Gets $7.7 Million From Additional Subcontractor

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

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

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    Recent Case Brings Clarity and Questions to Statute of Repose Application

    Local Government Waives Construction Fees to Spur Jobs

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    Increased Expenditure on Injuries for New York City School Construction

    The King of Construction Defect Scams

    New Buildings in California Soon Must Be Greener

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    OSHA Extends Delay of Residential Construction Fall Protection Requirements

    Water District Denied New Trial in Construction Defect Claim

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

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

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

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

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Construction Defect Exception Does Not Lift Bar in Payment Dispute

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

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

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Allowing the Use of a General Verdict Form in a Construction Defect Case Could Subject Your Client to Prejudgment Interest

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

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

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    US Courts in Nevada Busy with Yellow Brass

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    When is a Construction Project truly “Complete”? That depends. (law note)

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Builder Cannot Receive Setoff in Construction Defect Case

    Federal District Court Continues to Find Construction Defects do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Will They Blow It Up?

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

    Colorado Senate Bill 12-181: 2012’s Version of a Prompt Pay Bill

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Death of Construction Defect Lawyer Ruled a Suicide

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Association May Not Make Claim Against Builder in Vermont Construction Defect Case

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain
    Corporate Profile

    WABASH COUNTY INDIANA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 5500 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Wabash County, Indiana Construction Expert Witness Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Wabash County'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.

    Wabash County Indiana general contracting construction cost estimating expert witnessWabash County Indiana general contracting expert witness structural engineerWabash County Indiana general contracting roofing and waterproofing expert witnessWabash County Indiana general contracting defective construction expertWabash County Indiana general contracting expert witness commercial buildingsWabash County Indiana general contracting construction forensic expert witnessWabash County Indiana general contracting architectural engineering expert witnessWabash County Indiana general contracting construction expert witnessesWabash County Indiana general contracting civil engineer expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Wabash County, Indiana

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Law360 reports that Arch Specialty Insurance Company has settled over claims that it wrongly denied coverage in a construction defect claim. The court dismissed Arch with prejudice. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed and the attorneys made not comment to Law360.

    Read the full story…


    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    May 20, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    PR Newswire reports that the Carolinas Associated General Contractors (CAGC) have successfully persuaded the South Carolina legislature to pass a bill restoring commercial general liability (CGL) coverage. Governor Nikki Hartley signed the legislation on May 17.

    A South Carolina Supreme Court decision given on January 7, 2011, had ended commercial general liability coverage in the state. Senate Bill 431 addressed this decision, restoring the ability of home builders to obtain CGL coverage.

    PR Newswire quotes South Carolina homebuilder, Allen Amsler: “We have seen a lot of legislation with substantial impact to our business over the years. However, I would place this in the same level of importance with the original tort reform legislation. The effects of the Supreme Court’s ruling could have been catastrophic to our industry in South Carolina had it not been for this bill. Thanks to all those in the House, Senate and the Governor’s office who assisted us.”

    Read the full story…


    West Coast Casualty Promises Exciting Line Up at the Nineteenth Annual Conference

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    West Coast Casualty has announced the lineup for the annual WCC Construction Defect Seminar. This year’s seminar will be the nineteenth anniversary, and it will be held on May 17th and 18th, 2012 in Anaheim, California. They are the largest construction defect event in the world and this year’s seminar will again bring the top people in the field to address many of the current issues and where the construction defect community will be going in the future.

    The event, anticipated to be even larger than prior years, will have numerous panels and presentations on the current state of construction defect litigation. Among the topics that will be presented are “Arbitrate? Let’s See You Make Me!” “Defending Construction Defect Failure Mechanisms?An Expert’s Perspective,” and “Current Trends in Effectively Handling SB800 Cases.”

    Speakers at the event will include judges, lawyers, and representatives of the insurance industry. One event, “Meet Your Judges, A Candid Discussion on Construction Defect Claims and Litigation from the Bench?” will include judges from five states, including the Honorable Nancy M. Saitta, Chief Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court, the Honorable Clifton Newman of the South Carolina Circuit Court, and the Honorable Rex Heeseman of the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

    Daniel A. Berman, Esq. and Stephen Henning, Esq. will be talking on the topic of “Social Networking Sites: Strategies, Ethical Pitfalls, and Practice Pointers for Litigating and Winning Your Construction Defect Case.” Mr. Berman is a Founding and Managing Partner of Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP. He has been named a Southern California Super Lawyer for eight consecutive years. Mr. Henning is a Founding Partner of Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman, LLP and Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America. Mr. Henning will also be one of the presenters on the panel “Important Court Decisions Impacting Construction Defect Claims.”

    The panel “Why Do We Need to Know Certain Things and How Decisions Are Made” will be presented by important figures in the construction claims industry, including Phyllis Modlin, Todd Schweitzer, Teresa D. Wolcott, and Lee Wright. Ms. Modlin is a Construction Defect Claims Supervisor responsible for nationwide claims for Markel Corporation. Mr. Schweitzer is an Assistant Vice President of Major Case for Construction Defect and Professional Liability Claims Services at Zurich North America. Ms. Wolcott is the National Product Manager for Construction Defect Claims within the Construction Claims Organization at Travelers Insurance. Mr. Wright is an Assistant Vice President and Senior Claims Consultant for XL Specialty Insurance.

    The event will also include a Science and Technology Fair in which exhibitors will be presenting technological problem solving and decision making as they relate to resolving ongoing construction and post construction-defect related issues while reducing costs for all those involved in claims and litigation. The fair is dedicated to these novel applications of science and technology that benefit the construction defect community but are not yet commonly available. This will be the third time the Construction Defect Seminar will include a Science and Technology Fair.

    Sessions at the event are approved for MCLE credit in Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. MCLE credits vary by state; attendees can obtain up to 10.25 hours of credit in Arizona, California, Maine, and New York. Applications for several other states are still pending. Additionally, the event is also worth continuing education credits with the Florida Department of Insurance and for Registered Professional Adjusters. West Coast Casualty has applications pending for adjuster continuing education in an additional thirty-six states.

    West Coast Casualty recommends this event for anyone involved in construction or construction defect claims, whether they are a claims adjuster, a member of a homeowner board, a judge, a property manager, a construction claims attorney, a general contractor, or anyone else with an interest in this area. The event typically has more than 1,600 attendees. Those interested can register online.

    Read the full story…


    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Federal Highway Administration has released a list of bridges and overpasses that may be prone to corrosion problems due to grout that was in chlorides when it was supposed to be completely free of them. Currently, the FHA is working with state departments of transportation to determine if the defective grout was indeed used on additional bridges and overpasses. The initial FHA list of structures determined to have been built with the defective grout lists thirty-four sites, of which four are in Ohio, the largest number for any state.

    California contains only one such site, the intersection of the 55 and 405 freeways, one of the few items on the list not designated as a bridge.

    Read the full story…


    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    May 20, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) reports that Representatives Gary Miller (CA), Brad Miller (NC) and twenty-nine cosponsors have put forth a bill with bipartisan support to “address the severe credit crunch for acquisition, development, and construction (AD&C) financing.” They report in addition to more than 1.4 million construction workers who have been “idled since 2006,” the housing slump has cost 3 million jobs and $145 million in wages.

    NAHB reports that they worked closely with lawmakers on the bill. The association had members meet with legislators both in D.C. and in their home districts. They state that HR 1755 would help homebuilders “find the credit they need to move forward with new or existing projects.”

    The bill would allow lenders to use the value upon completion when assessing loan collateral and ban the use of foreclosed or distressed sale properties in assessing values of projects. The would bill would also lessen restrictions by banking regulators, which the lead sponsors said “have hindered federal and state chartered banks and thrifts’ ability to make and maintain loans to qualified small home builders that have viable projects.”

    The NAHB is urging members of Congress to cosponsor the bill and is urging the Senate to introduce a companion bill.

    Read the full story…

    Read HR 1755


    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    June 7, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Las Vegas Sun reports that Assembly Bill 401, the construction defect bill, lost in a vote of 9 to 12. The measure extended the time for construction defect suits to be filed, awarded legal costs only to successful plaintiffs, and set a definition of construction defects. Two Democrats joined the Republicans in the Senate in defeating the bill.

    Read the full story…


    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

    August 11, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Mosser Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., No. 09-4449 (6th Cir. July 14, 2011)(unpublished), claimant project owner Port Clinton contracted with insured general contractor Mosser for the construction of a building.  Following completion, Port Clinton sued Mosser for breach of contract seeking damages because of physical injury to the project occurring after completion resulting from defective backfill material that settled improperly.

    Mosser’s CGL insurer Travelers denied a defense and Mosser filed suit against Travelers seeking a declaratory judgment. Mosser and Travelers filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue of whether the supplier of the backfill material?Gerken?qualified as a subcontractor for purposes of the subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion—exclusion l.—for property damage to or arising out of Mosser’s completed work.   Mosser had purchased the backfill material from Gerken pursuant to a purchase order specifying that Gerken was to supply Mosser with an industry standard grade of backfill for use in the Port Clinton project.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The San Bernardino office of the California District Attorney is partnering with the California Contractor’s State License Board to check if subcontractors are holding the required workers compensation insurance. The High Desert Daily Press reports that the process of checking at sites has been going on for several months.

    Investigators visit sites and ask supervisors to provide a list of subcontractors which the state then checks for compliance. One worker was quoted that insurance inspections were so rare that he had never seen one before, despite 20 years in construction.

    On one day, investigators in two teams visited fourteen construction sites and reviewed the insurance status of twenty-two firms. Three were found out of compliance and stop work orders were issued.

    Read the full story…


    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Court of Appeals of Washington has struck down a construction defect settlement between a building owner and the companies she hired to repair the siding, among other repairs to bring the building up to code. Yuan Zhang hired Hawk Construction LLC to do repair work. Hawk, in turn, hired Ready Construction LLC for some aspects of the project. Hawk and Ready were both insured by Capital Specialty Insurance Corporation.

    There were several problems with Ready’s work. After removing old siding, they did not protect the building, nor did they remove all of the damaged layers. Ready covered, but did not fix, a mildew problem under the old siding. When new siding was reattached, the nails used were too short to adequately attach it.

    After paying for an inspection of the work, Zhang had Hawk and Ready begin the repairs again, but the work was abandoned without being completed. Zhang sued Hawk for breach of contract. Hawk then sued Ready, claiming that “Ready was liable to Hawk to the extent that Hawk was liable to Zhang.” Capitol retained defense for both contractors.

    Zhang settled with Hawk, in an agreement that gave her “the right to collect and/or pursue all costs and attorney fees paid by Hawk or its insurance company defending against the Zhang’s claims and pursuing claims against Ready.” Subsequently, she also settled with Ready. Both companies ceased operations.

    Zhang had the settlements reviewed by a court, which concluded that the settlements were reasonable. Capital was allowed to appeal, claiming that the settlement included costs that were Zhang’s responsibility. The appeals court did not examine the question of the reasonableness of the settlement, concluding that Capitol’s interests were relevant only to “questions of bad faith, collusion, and fraud.”

    In the case of Zhang, the court concluded that the relationship between Zhang and her former contractors was collusive. The court noted that “bad faith or collusion may exist when the evidence indicates a joint effort to create, in a non-adversarial atmosphere, a resolution beneficial to both parties, yet highly prejudicial to the insurer as intervener.” The court noted that both companies had minimal assets which were, in any case, exempted from the agreement. Further, the court found that the agreements failed to determine “what amount of the repairs related to preexisting water damage.” Zhang’s calculation of costs also included her expenses for architectural and engineering services, which the court points out, “where always Zhang’s costs to bear.”

    The court concluded that “the overall structure of the settlements is highly probative of collusion, fraud, or bad faith.” Zhang’s agreements with Hawk and Ready allowed her to collect compensation from Hawk and then collect Ready’s compensation to Hawk for their portion of the settlement, allowing Zhang to collect the monies twice. Further, she was allowed to pursue Capitol for Hawk’s attorney expenses, even though Hawk had none. “The right to recover Hawk’s fees merely set up a windfall recovery for Zhang.” The court described the agreements among Zhang, Hawk, and Ready as “precisely the type of manipulation [the law] is intended to preclude.”

    Read the court’s decision…


    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Third Circuit Court has allowed claims to go forward against Owens Corning for making allegedly defective shingles. The shingles split, leading to leaking roofs. The building products manufacturer filed for bankruptcy in 2000, which “extinguished” claims against it. The company was facing millions in liabilities over asbestos lawsuits.

    The lawsuit was filed in 2009. The courts initially found the lawsuit timely, but the Third Circuit Court later applied determined the exposure stated before the bankruptcy. On appeal, the court has reversed this and is again allowing the suit to proceed.

    Read the full story…


    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Glen C. Hansen, writing on Abbott & Kinderman’s Land Use Law Blog looks at several cases pending before the California Supreme Court which ask if a developer can insist on arbitration of construction defect claims, based on provision in the CC&Rs. Currently, there is a split of opinions in the California appeals courts on the issue.

    Four of the cases are in California’s Fourth Appellate District. In the earliest case, Villa Milano Homeowners Association v. Il Davorge, from 2000, the court concluded that the arbitration clause was sufficient to require that construction defect claims undergo arbitration. However, the Fourth Appellate District Court concluded in three later cases that the arbitration clauses did not allow the developer to compel arbitration. In two cases, argued in 2008 and 2010, the court concluded that to do otherwise would deprive the homeowners of their right to a jury trial. In the most recent case, Villa Vicenza Homeowners Association v. Nobel Court Development, the court decided that the CC&Rs did not create contractual rights for the developer.

    The Second Appellate District Court came to a similar decision in Promenade at Playa Vista Homeowners Association v. Western Pacific Housing, Inc. In their decision, the court noted that CC&Rs could be enforced by homeowners and homeowners associations, but not developers.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A Bronx construction worker died when the pillars gave way in the basement where he was working. The two-story commercial building collapsed, burying Mr. Kebbeh under about six feet of rubble. The New York Times reports that firefighters dug him out with their bare hands. Mr. Kebbeh was taken to Jacobi Medical Center where he died. Two other construction workers escaped unharmed.

    Read the full story…


    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    August 2, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Seventh Circuit predicted that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would adopt the continuous injury trigger for first party property loss that extends over several policy periods. Miller v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12940 (7th Cir. June 25, 2012).

    A home inspection report performed before the Millers purchased their home showed a soft spot on the roof. The stucco's finish color was also uneven and stained. Further, some water damage was found in the study and skylights above the kitchen sink. But the report advised that the exterior walls, chimney, grass roof, flashings, floor joists/beams and columns, garage walls and floor appeared serviceable. A roof specialist determined the soft spot was not significant and could be repaired for $1,500.

    The Millers purchased a homeowner's policy from Safeco on June 30, 2005. The policy went into effect the next day when the Millers closed on the property. But the Millers did not see the policy's terms until Safeco mailed them a copy of the policy at the end of July.

    Before receiving the policy, the Millers discovered severe inner wall water leaks and significant water infiltration on three of the home's exterior walls.

    Read the full story…

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


    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    October 23, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    American Woodmark, the manufacturer of several national brands of cabinets and vanities, saw greater than anticipated earnings in its most recent quarter. Their revenue was $148.3 million, an increase of 13% over the same quarter a year prior. They saw a 40% increase in sales. As a result, their per-share earnings were 7 cents, instead of the projected loss of 3 cents per share. Forbes reports that the share price for American Woodmark has been rising in August 2012.

    Read the full story…


    New Buildings in California Soon Must Be Greener

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The California Energy Commission has approved new energy efficiency standards for new homes and commercial buildings. The 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are set to go into effect on January 1, 2014, and will require 30% more energy efficiency for non-residential construction and 25% more for homes. The standards do not affect hospitals, nursing homes, or prisons.

    Buildings covered under the standard will have to have roofs that ready for the installation of solar panels. Additionally, non-residential buildings will require high-performance windows, advanced lighting controls, and cool-roof technologies. Residential requirements include insulated hot-water pipes, whole house fans, and more efficient windows.

    The new standards are expected to add 3,500 new building industry jobs. One thing these construction workers won’t be building are power plants, since over the next thirty years, the standards are expected to save as much as six power plants.

    Read the full story…


    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    October 28, 2011 — Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc. - Corporate Offices

    Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc., one of the nation’s leading construction forensics firms is pleased to announce the expansion of the company’s civil and structural engineering capabilities.

    JERRY M. MILES, PE - Mr. Miles has been a licensed civil engineer in California since 1987 and has served as the lead civil engineer on many projects in several states. His experience includes contract administration services as the owner’s representative on a variety of projects including mastered planned communities, residential subdivisions, shopping centers and multi-family residential projects. He has also been involved in providing water quality management plans and storm water pollution prevention plans. Mr. Miles has also served on the Town of Apple Valley’s Building Department Dispute Resolution Board.

    His more than 26 years of engineering experience includes geotechnical evaluations, structural design of wood-framed, masonry, and concrete tilt-up buildings, small and large subdivision engineering construction/improvements plans, hydrology/hydraulic reports and design, forensic investigation and expert witness testimony. Mr. Miles has qualified as an expert in numerous jurisdictions and Federal court. He has been called upon to provide deposition testimony on more than twenty-five occasions and has successfully testified at arbitration and trial. Click here to view Mr. Miles’ Current CV.

    MATTHEW J. STIEFEL, PE - With a background that spans a multitude of design and new construction projects to catastrophic claims analysis, Mr. Stiefel brings a unique set of credentials and experience to the construction experts group at Bert L. Howe & Associates. Mr. Stiefel has more than 13 years’ experience in civil, structural, and geotechnical engineering; providing design and construction consulting services on a variety of projects that include multi-family and single family dwellings, commercial buildings, transportation facilities, industrial facilities, storm drain channels, water and wastewater pipelines. His engineering experience encompasses multiple disciplines of civil engineering including geotechnical design and evaluation, foundation design, structural design of wood-framed buildings, preparation of grading plans and site drainage analysis. He has provided cause and origin analysis for insurance adjusters on many residential and commercial sites related to issues involving moisture intrusion and mold, foundation movement, site drainage, soil movement, wind damage, and other various losses. Click here to view Mr. Stiefel’s Current CV.


    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Supreme Court of New Hampshire has ruled in the case Wyle v. Lees. The Leeses owned a two-unit apartment building in North Conway, New Hampshire. They hired a contractor to add a third, larger apartment, including a two-car garage. The Leeses and their contractor submitted a building permit application. They were informed that site plan review was required. After receiving approval on the site plan, construction started. At no point did they obtain a building permit and the construction was never inspected. The Leeses subsequently added more space to the unit, reducing parking spaces below the minimum required. Again, they did not obtain a building permit.

    In 2007, three years after all these changes were complete, the Leeses sold their building to Mr. Wyle. To the question “are you aware of any modifications or repairs made without the necessary permits?” they answered “no.” About six weeks after closing, Wyle “received a letter from the town code enforcement officer regarding the legality of the removal of a garage door from the new unit.” A subsequent inspection revealed “numerous building and life safety code violations.”

    Mr. Wyle brought a claim against the Leeses for negligent misrepresentation. The defendants filed a motion “seeking to preclude economic loss damages.” At a two-day bench trial, Mr. Wyle won. The Leeses appealed.

    The appeals court found that “the defendants negligently misrepresented that the premises were licensed for immediate occupancy and that the defendants had obtained all necessary permits,” and thus upheld the lower court’s finding of negligent misrepresentation. The appeals court also rejected the Leeses’ argument that damages must be apportioned on all parties, including “the plaintiff himself, the plaintiff’s building inspector, and the defendant’s contractor,” finding a lack of “adequate evidence.”

    The Leeses further argued that they were unaware that modifications and repairs were accomplished without the required permits. The appeals court noted that “the trial court found that both the conditional approval and final approval for the site plan stated that a building permit and a certificate of occupancy were required prior to any use.” The court concluded that the Leeses “knew or should have known of the falsity of their representation.”

    The appeals affirmed the findings of the trial court.

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…