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

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Weed California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    North State Building Industry Association
    Local # 0540
    1536 Eureka Rd
    Roseville, CA 95661
    http://www.northstatebia.org

    California Building Industry Association
    Local # 0500
    1215 K Street Ste 1200
    Sacramento, CA 95814
    http://www.cbia.org

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area - Northern Division
    Local # 0538
    PO Box 7100
    Santa Rosa, CA 95407


    Building Industry Association of the Delta
    Local # 0513
    315 N San Joaquin St Ste 2
    Stockton, CA 95202
    http://www.biadelta.org

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area
    Local # 0538
    101 Ygnacio Valley Rd # 210
    Walnut Creek, CA 94596
    http://www.biabayarea.org

    Building Industry Association of the Bay Area - Eastern Division
    Local # 0538
    PO Box 5160
    San Ramon, CA 94583


    Building Industry Association of Central California
    Local # 0536
    900 H St Ste E2
    Modesto, CA 95354
    http://www.biacc.com


    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Weed California

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

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

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    New Households Moving to Apartments

    California Lawyer Gives How-To on Pursuing a Construction Defect Claim

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

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    General Contractors Must Plan to Limit Liability for Subcontractor Injury

    Williams v. Athletic Field: Hugely Important Lien Case Argued Before Supreme Court

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

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Construction Defect Lawsuits? There’s an App for That

    Statutes of Limitations May be the Colorado Contractors’ Friend

    Avoid Gaps in Construction Defect Coverage

    Town Files Construction Lawsuit over Dust

    Virginia Homebuilding Slumps After Last Year’s Gain

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Timing of Insured’s SIR Payment Has No Effect on Non-Participating Insurer’s Equitable Contribution to Co-Insurer

    Battle of “Other Insurance” Clauses

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

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Plans Go High Tech

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    California Supreme Court Binds Homeowner Associations To Arbitration Provisions In CC&Rs

    Will They Blow It Up?

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Water Drainage Case Lacks Standing

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

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

    Exclusion Bars Coverage for Mold, Fungus

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Ensuing Loss Found Ambiguous, Allowing Coverage

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    $5 Million Construction Defect Lawsuit over Oregon Townhomes

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    Federal District Court Predicts Florida Will Adopt Injury In Fact Trigger

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    Des Moines Home Builders Building for Habitat for Humanity

    Rihanna Finds Construction Defects Hit a Sour Note

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered

    Judge Okays Harmon Tower Demolition, Also Calls for More Testing

    In Re Golba: The Knaubs v. Golba and Rollison, Debtors

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

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

    Colorado Court of Appeals Rejects Retroactive Application of C.R.S. § 13-20-808.

    No Coverage for Negligent Misrepresentation without Allegations of “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage”

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Florida Construction Defect Case Settled for $3 Million

    Celebrities Lose Case in Construction Defect Arbitration

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Colorado “occurrence”

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    Loss Caused by Seepage of Water Not Covered

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    Can Negligent Contractors Shift Blame in South Carolina?

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend in Water Intrusion Case

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Contractor’s Home Not Covered for Construction Defects

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology
    Corporate Profile

    WEED CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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









    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Weed, California

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    November 18, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The contractor was covered as an additional insured under the subcontractor’s policy even though the parties had never actually signed an agreement to add the contractor to the policy. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Westchester Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 20081 (9th Cir. Oct. 3, 2011).

    The policies held by Bellevue Master, the general contractor, required it to be an additional insured under any subcontractor’s liability policy. Northwest Tower Crane Services was a subcontractor. Bellevue Master LLC, faxed a message that Northwest could continue to be a subcontractor on the project if it complied with Bellevue Master’s insurance requirements. Northwest contacted its insurance broker and requested an insurance certificate be issued to Bellevue Master so that it would be an additional insured under Northwest’s policy.

    Read the full story…

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


    Home Sales Still Low, But Enough to Spur Homebuilders

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Although new home sales are still fifty percent below the average over the last forty years, the housing rebound has sent stock of homebuilders up 53 percent this year, during the same period, the S&P 500 rose only 12 percent. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that from 2005 through 2011, homebuilder stocks trailed the S&P 500.

    The growth isn’t limited to homebuilders alone. Building suppliers are also seeing a growth in sales, with profits for companies that make gypsum wallboard, cabinetry, plumbing products, and other items used in home building.

    Homebuilders have also been able to raise prices. Standard Pacific Corp of Irvine, California has raised prices and cut incentives. Nevertheless, the buyers still come. PulteGroup and D.R. Horton are also raising prices.

    Read the full story…


    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The South Carolina Court of Appeals has reversed a partial summary judgment issued by one of the lower courts in the case of The Retreat at Edisto Co-Owners Association v. The Retreat at Edisto. The underlying issues of the case deal with a construction defect complaint.

    The lower court had concluded “Developer’s ‘First Amendment’ to the Master Deed required the Developer to satisfy the provision in the paragraph labeled ‘Master Deed Amendment or Phase II’ as a condition precedent to its election to proceed with the development of Phase II.”

    The appeals court found that “the language of the First Amendment to the Master Deed is susceptible to more than one interpretation.” The court additionally concluded that the “Developer presented the requisite scintilla of evidence on the question of its intent in order to establish a genuine issue of material fact. As the material facts were in dispute, the appeals court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case to the circuit court for further proceedings.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    September 1, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Although the court determined there was an occurrence, coverage was excluded by the business risk exclusions.  See Cont’l W. Ins. Co. v. Shay Constr. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82839 (D. Colo. July 28, 2011).

    White was the general contractor on the project. White had three subcontracts with Shay to provide framing, siding, and related work on the project. Shay was insured under a CGL policy issued by Continental Western.

    Two of Shay’s subcontractors furnished materials, labor and equipment to Shay. These subcontractors filed suit in state court alleging they had not been compensated for the work and materials. White and Shay were named as defendants. White cross claimed against Shay, alleging Shay had breached its obligations under the subcontracts. Several allegations sounded in contract. Other allegations, however, contended Shay had performed defective work and had damaged the work of other trades in correcting deficiencies in its own performance.

    Shay sought coverage under Continental Western’s policy. Continental Western filed suit for a declaratory judgment and moved for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

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


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

    March 16, 2011 — March 16, 2011 Construction Defect Journal Staff

    According to a story published last Thursday in Seattle PI: " The 25-story McGuire Apartments, at Second Avenue and Wall Street, would cost more to fix than the building is worth, according to its owners. Its most serious defect involves steel cables that are corroding inside of concrete slabs because the ends weren’t properly treated with a rust-proof coating and a pocket in the edge of the concrete that wasn’t properly sealed"

    The report by Aubrey Cohen outlines the demolition plans which are expected to take between 12 and 18 months, and will utilize robotic Brokk Machines. The demolition plan calls for one story at a time to be demolished, with the debris to be trucked offsite. Demolition plans aim to minimize disruption to residents and businesses in the area by Limiting work 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturdays with "impact and percussive activities" limited to 8 a.m to 5 p.m weekdays.

    Read More...


    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The high school gym in Lake Oswego, Oregon has been shut down because testing has revealed that the construction defects have lead to deterioration of the structural integrity of the roof. The school district noted that there was a chance of collapse if there were a “significant seismic event or heavy rain and winds and snow.” The school district has been in a lawsuit with the builders since 2008, which was recently settled for $600,000.

    The school board is still determining whether the original contractor will be asked to correct the defect or if they will bid the job out.

    Read the full story...


    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    September 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The LA Times reports that Raoul Germain, a city Los Angeles building inspector has been sentenced to 21 months in prison after pleading guilty to taking bribes. Germain was caught as part of an FBI sting operation in which he approved work in exchange for thousands of dollars in bribes. The Times notes that that in some cases, Germain never visited the construction sites. Germain was offered a chance to cooperate with investigators. His lawyer, Steve Cron asked the Times, “What do you think happens to someone who cooperates?”

    In addition to Germain, another city inspector has pleaded guilty to taking bribes and two more employees of the Department of Building and Safety have been fired in connection with the investigation.

    Read the full story…


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

    August 4, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    On July 28, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled in Clasen Fruit & Cold Storage v. Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. that more than six years had passed since a contractor had concluded work and so granted a summary dismissal of the suit.

    Frederick & Michael Construction Co., Inc. (F&M) was contracted to construct several buildings for Clasen Fruit and Cold Storage. These were completed in March, 1999. The buildings suffered wind damage to the roofs in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006. In the first two incidents, F&M repaired the roofs with Clasen paying for repairs.

    In 2005, Clasen hired Continuous Gutter to make repairs. The final incident was the collapse of the roof of one building. This was attributed to “excessive moisture in the roof’s vapor barriers.” At this point, Clasen demanded that F&M pay for repair and replacement costs. In 2008, Clasen sued F&M for damages for breach of contract and negligent design and construction of the roof.

    The decision then covered the meanings, in Washington law, of “termination of services” and “substantial completion.” The panel concluded that construction was “substantially completed in 1997” and “relevant services” by 2001. “But Clasen did not sue until 2008, some seven years after termination of any roof related services.”

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…


    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    August 4, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    In the case of Continental Western Insurance Company v. Shay Construction Inc., Judge Walker Miller has granted a summary judgment against Shay Construction and their co-defendant, Milender White Construction Company.

    Shay was the framing subcontractor for Milender White on what the court described as “a major construction project in Grand County, Colorado.” Two of Shay’s subcontractors, Wood Source Inc. and Chase Lumber Company furnished materials, labor, and equipment to Shay. They subsequently sued for nonpayment and sought to enforce mechanic’s liens, naming both Shay and Milender as defendants. Milender White alleged that Shay had “breached its obligation under its subcontracts with Milender White.”

    Shay’s insurance provider, Continental Western, stated that its coverage did not include “the dispute between Shay, its subcontractors, particularly the cross claims asserted by Milender White.” Shay then sued Continental Western, alleging breach of contract and statutory bad faith.

    The court, however, has found with Continental Western and has granted them a summary judgment. They found “no genuine issue as to any material fact.” The judge did not side with Continental Western on their interpretation of the phrase “those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages.” The court found that the Colorado courts have not limited this to tort actions only. However, as Milender’s cross claim included claims of faulty workmanship on the part of Shay, Judge Miller found for Continental.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    April 6, 2011 — April 6, 2011 - By Mark VonderHaar and Yvette Davis in the Haight Brown & Bonesteel Blog

    On February 24, 2011, the California Court of Appeal held in Jeffrey Tverberg, et al v. Fillner Construction, Inc. that the imposition of direct liability on a hirer turns on whether the hirer exercised retained control of worksite safety in such a manner that affirmatively contributed to the independent contractor’s injury. Twice, Tverberg, an independent contractor hired by a general contractor's subcontractor, asked the general contractor to make the job site safe by covering up open holes created by another unrelated subcontractor while Tverberg was working at the site. After Tverberg was injured at the site by falling in a hole, he sued both the general contractor and the subcontractor which had hired him.

    The Court of Appeal reasoned that when the general contractor instructed another subcontractor to create a condition that was potentially dangerous (i.e., creating open and uncovered bollard holes), and simultaneously required Tverberg to perform unrelated work near the open holes, the general contractor s conduct may have constituted a negligent exercise of its retained control which affirmatively contributed to Tverberg’s injury. The Court also reasoned that the general contractor affirmatively assumed responsibility for the safety of the workers near the holes by only requiring stakes and safety ribbon, and negligently discharged that responsibility which resulted in injury.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Mark VonderHaar and Yvette Davis of Haight Brown & Bonesteel. Mr. VonderHaar can be contacted at mvonderhaar@hbblaw.com and Ms. Davis at ydavis@hbblaw.com.


    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    March 28, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Broad Sustainable Building has leapfrogged in China’s construction boom by building a thirty-story hotel in just fifteen days in the city of Changsha. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, most of the building was prefabricated, but most prefabricated buildings require a longer time for assembly. Broad claimed that it cut no corners on safety. However, Zhang Li, a Beijing architect, told the Times that “incredible speed also means incredible risk.”

    At the completion date, the interior was still partially finished. Some rooms were furnished, while others weren’t quite so ready. The hotel will be used to house clients who are visiting Broad and some of its employees.

    Broad called their process “the most profound innovation in human history” and predicted that soon a third of new buildings worldwide would be constructed this way. The company anticipates using the same process to build taller buildings, with hopes of eventually constructing a 150-story building.

    China is currently undergoing a building boom which Zhang attributed to a desire to catch up to the developed world. As a result of this boom, he noted that building inspections are often skipped in China to speed up building.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Court Adopts Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Although the Nevada Supreme Court adopted the efficient proximate cause doctrine, it determined it did not apply to salvage coverage under an all-risk policy for a rain-damaged building. Fourth Street Place, LLC v. The Travelers Indemn. Co., 2011 Nev LEXIS 114 (Nev. Dec. 29, 2011).

    Fourth Street owned an office building which was insured by an all-risk policy issued by Travelers. Fourth Street hired Above It All Roofing to repair the roof of the office building. Above It All removed the waterproof membrane on the roof and prepared to replace the membrane the following week. Over the weekend, however, substantial rain hit. On Sunday, Above It All returned to cover the exposed portions of the roof with tarps, but wind later blew the tarps away. The building suffered significant interior damage as it continued to be exposed to the rain.

    Read the full story…

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


    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    July 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Idaho Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Perception Construction Management v. Bell. The Bells hired PCM to build a log home, agreeing to play monthly invoices in full within ten days. The Bells paid the first four invoices in full, part of the fifth, and ceased payment after that. Beofre seventh invoice, the Bells terminated the contract and hired a new contractor. PCM filed a claim of lien and ceased work.

    The Bells responded that PCM was in breach of contract and had failed to fulfill the contract in a workmanlike manner. They claimed construction defects and in the lien suit, sought to include testimony from an architect and a plumber reviewing PCM’s work. The court only allowed the architect to testify as to whether the amount of the lien was reasonable. No testimony was permitted from the plumber.

    The Idaho Supreme Court concluded that the claims of construction defects were important to case and remanded it to the lower court for a new trial taking into evidence that Bell’s contention that PCM’s work was defective.

    Read the court’s decision


    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    September 1, 2011 — CJD Staff

    Citing public safety concerns and the cost of repair, MGM Resorts International is seeking to demolish the unfinished hotel tower. The company has a few hurdles to go through before they start laying the charges to implode the structure. Any plans would have to be approved by not only Clark County officials, but also the district court has an order blocking any activity during litigation between MGM and the general contractor on the project, Perini Building Company.

    Architectural Record reports that MGM states it would take “approximately 18 months to conduct test and come up with an approved, permitted design to fix the Harmon.” MGM feels that repairs would then take another two to three years. Perini contends that they could “provide stamped drawings detailing all necessary repairs within three months.” They attribute MGM’s desire to demolish the building as “buyer’s remorse.”

    Read the full story…


    Seven Tips to Manage Construction Defect Risk

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Jody T. Wright looks at “seven strategies being used around the country to identify, manage and mitigate your exposures” in a piece in Business Insurance. Wright, Senior VP, Construction Department Manager for Lockton Companies in Denver, gives seven simple steps from the perspective of a insurer.

    His first step is to match your project to your insurance. He suggests keeping the riskier projects separate, noting that from an insurer’s point-of-view, “any project that creates a homeowners association carries a higher potential threat of future litigation.” This leads to his second point: you need to “determine what makes your liability insurer nervous.” In other words, talk with your insurer.

    His third point suggests that builders look back and see if there is a pattern of problems that have lead to payouts from your insurer. Keep your insurer happier by making sure these areas don’t continue to be problems. Nor should you look for new problems. He suggests against leading in new technologies.

    Three more points deal with being careful about with whom you associate. He tells builders to negotiate their contracts, avoiding clauses that would obligate a builder to “indemnify the owner for the negligent work of others that they did not control.” Avoid subcontractors “with loss patterns that might affect your project and reputation.” Builders should identify “owners with a pattern of suing contractors” adding that risk to the cost of the job. They should also identify “the most effective attorneys and expert witnesses” and get them involved before the litigation starts.

    Read the full story…


    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    June 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Negotiations for the Nevada state budget have stalled over proposals to amend the state’s construction defect laws. Assembly Republicans had offered changes to the law to make it friendlier to contractors; however, after a state Supreme Court ruling that the state could not move a local government entity’s funds into state coffers, pressure has increased on the governor to lift the expiration dates of taxes approved in 2009.

    The Reno Gazette-Journal quotes John Madole, a construction industry lobbyist, “We agree with them that you have to address the issue of the attorney fees, and for all practical purposes, they are automatically awarded when anybody brings any kind of suit.”

    Speaker of the Assembly, John Oceguera, a Democrat, has proposed a bill that “makes it absolutely crystal clear that the only time you get attorney's fees is if you're the prevailing party.”

    Read the full story…


    Contractors with Ties to Trustees Reaped Benefits from LA Community College Modernization Program

    March 3, 2011 — Original reporting by Gale Holland, Michael Finnegan and Doug Smith, Los Angeles Times

    In the latest installment of the “Billions To Spend” series of investigative reports focused on construction defects, management, and cost issues relevant to LACC’s Community College Modernization Projects, the LA Times examines the costs associated with the various layers of construction management and benefits that accrued to contractors with ties to LACC trustees.

    The reporting by the Times is seemingly critical of the project’s utilization of “body shops” an industry term for companies that function as employers of record. The article segment published today cites a number of circumstances wherein their utilization appears to have escalated costs substantially.

    “To gauge the cost of the staffing system, The Times reviewed thousands of pages of financial records from April 2007, when URS began managing the program, to July 2010. Reporters identified two dozen contractors serving as conduits for pay and benefits for employees they did not supervise.

    At least 230 people were employed in this manner, at a total cost of about $40 million, the records show.

    Approximately $18 million of the total was paid to the employees, according to the Times analysis. The remaining $22 million went to profit and overhead for contractors, the records indicate.

    For employees on its own payroll, the district says that medical and other benefits increase compensation costs 40% above base salaries. So if the district had employed its construction staff directly, the total cost for the period studied would have been $25 million instead of $40 million, a savings of $15 million, The Times calculated.”

    Read Full Story...