BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California tract home expert witness Anaheim California custom homes expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California condominium expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California condominiums expert witness Anaheim California structural steel construction expert witness Anaheim California institutional building expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California parking structure expert witness Anaheim California office building expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California Subterranean parking expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California
    Anaheim California forensic architectAnaheim California expert witness structural engineerAnaheim California soil failure expert witnessAnaheim California construction expert witness consultantAnaheim California slope failure expert witnessAnaheim California concrete expert witnessAnaheim California structural engineering expert witnesses
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Roofing Expert Witness Builders Information
    Anaheim, 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:


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Roofing Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501
    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501
    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Anaheim California Roofing Expert Witness 10/ 10


    Roofing Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA ROOFING EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Roofing Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Anaheim's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Roofing Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Attorneys Top Benchmark Litigation 2026 Guide

    November 09, 2025 —
    Benchmark Litigation has recognized the following members of Hunton’s insurance coverage team as Litigation Stars: practice head Syed S. Ahmad, partner Walter J. Andrews, and special counsel Lorelie (Lorie) S. Masters. Benchmark’s Litigation Star recognizes individuals who possess a strong case record and are consistently recommended by clients and peers as reputable and effective litigators. In addition, Benchmark named partner Geoffrey Fehling on its Future Stars list, which recognizes individuals who are consistently referenced by peers and clients as litigators who are building their reputations in the market. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

    Court Ends Trump Shutdown of NY's $5B Empire Wind, Second Offshore Project Revived

    February 17, 2026 —
    In a much-anticipated decision Jan. 15, the federal district court in Washington, D.C., revoked a construction shutdown ordered by the Trump administration against another major East Coast offshore wind project—the $5-billion Empire Wind underway south of New York City. The project's developer, Norway-based Equinor, won a stay and preliminary injunction in response to its lawsuit and one from the state, which aims to direct most of the project's planned 810 MW of power generation to the city's metro area. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Debra K. Rubin, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Rubin may be contacted at rubind@enr.com

    Risk Associated with Design-Build Project Delivery Method

    October 21, 2025 —
    The design-build project delivery method is when the design-builder (typically the contractor) is responsible for both the design and construction of the project. Thus, the responsibility for both the design and construction falls under the same umbrella and, naturally, carries more risk. The discussion below demonstrates risk involved in the design-build project delivery method, particularly in the government contracting arena:
    Design-build contracts are common for construction, renovations, and repair projects, where the government provides the contractor with its requirements, but the contractor is free to exercise its ingenuity in achieving that objective or standard of performance and selecting the means to do so. It is not uncommon for issues to arise in design-build contracts. One of the more common issues is when the contract describes a certain requirement, but later during the design process, the contractor will submit in the 35% or 100% design submittal with a lower requirement. The government will unknowingly approve that design, not realizing the contractor may have “slipped in” or made an error on one of the requirements; thus, the approved 100% design has a lower requirement as compared to the contract. In these situations, we have found that the government is justified in demanding the contractor provide the requirements specified in the RFP and resulting contract.
    Thus, our long-held rule has been that the government cannot properly be blamed for approving the design when the contractor failed to inform the government that its design deviated from Task Order minimum requirements.
    Appeals of - Meltech Corporation, Inc., ASBCA No. 61766, 2025 WL 2166133 (ASBCA 2025) (internal citations omitted).
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Report: 2023 NYC Crane Fire and Collapse Caused by Failed Hydraulic Hose

    December 30, 2025 —
    A disconnected hydraulic hose likely sprayed flammable oil onto a hot surface, igniting a blaze that compromised the luffing system of a tower crane on a busy New York City street, sending its boom crashing 500 ft to the ground, according to a long-awaited investigation into a 2023 crane fire and partial collapse on the west side of Manhattan. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Justin Rice, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Rice may be contacted at ricej@enr.com

    Ninth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Finding of No Coverage for Interior Leak

    March 24, 2026 —
    Applying California law, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that water damage caused by a leaking pipe over time was not covered under the insured’s homeowners’ policy. Mojica v. State Farm General Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 32405 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2025). A small hole, slightly larger than a pen tip in size, developed in a pressurized hot water pipe. The resulting leak lasted for nearly six days and released enough water to saturate and ruin all the subflooring and flooring in the insureds’ home. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Court to General Contractor: Too Late to Reclaim $600K Sub Overpayment

    March 03, 2026 —
    Massachusetts contractors and their attorneys are once again testing the limits of the state's 15-year-old prompt-pay law, with concerned prime contractors asking an appeals court to overturn a lower court ruling that they believe gives subcontractors a powerful upper hand in payment disputes. Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record
    Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com

    Turnover Traps for Community Associations: Investigate First, Release Claims Later

    April 14, 2026 —
    Turnover of a community association from developer control to owner control is a uniquely vulnerable moment. Developers are increasingly presenting Florida condominium and homeowners’ associations with “standard” settlement or release agreements at turnover, often being framed as routine steps to finalize the transition of control. In reality, these agreements can have sweeping consequences, including the release of construction-defect claims before the association has conducted any meaningful independent evaluation. The developer has years of project knowledge and access to plans, subcontractors, and internal records. The newly elected board is just beginning to organize, obtain documents, and understand the property’s condition. Many defects, especially those involving roofing, waterproofing, windows, or structural components, are latent and not yet visible. Signing a release at this stage means the association is making a binding decision under conditions of uncertainty, without full information, to release all future potential claims. Over the last few years, there has been a rise in reports of developers offering a packaged deal: they agree to complete certain repairs, often minor punch-list or cosmetic items, and to “forgive” an alleged financial deficit (often around $50,000) supposedly owed by the association from the developer-control period. In exchange, the association is asked to sign a broad release covering all claims, including known and unknown construction defects. To a new HOA board that received their community with limited operating and reserve funds, they are left with a difficult decision to either accept the developer’s offer or assess their owners to pay this alleged debt. These agreements are occasionally presented through community management companies, which may describe them as “standard” or "routine.” Whether due to misunderstanding or influence from the developer, management companies can unintentionally reinforce the idea that signing is expected. Any recommendation provided to HOAs about whether to sign these releases could open community management to liability down the road. The best practice for both associations and community managers is to refer any agreements to be reviewed by general counsel for the association. The following two case studies illustrate the real-world consequences: Case Study One: A newly transitioned board relies on its management company to negotiate with the developer-builder to resolve irrigation issues, pond concerns, and signage deficiencies, along with forgiving an asserted financial shortfall. In exchange, the board signs a broad release covering all claims, including latent defects. Within a year, several punch-list items remain incomplete, and more serious issues arise. When the association demands completion, the developer delays, prompting the association to seek advice on how to enforce the settlement agreement. The association hires counsel to hold the developer responsible for both the previously agreed-upon items and newly identified construction defects. However, when the association brings claims against the developer, the developer points to the release of all potential construction defects in the community. Thus, the only remaining remedy is limited to enforcement of the specific punch-list terms. The community, still relatively new, has no viable claims against the developer-builder for the construction defects. With warranties expired and the release, the association must fund repairs through special assessments, despite defects that would otherwise have been actionable. Case Study Two: A community is presented with a similar agreement as above. The management company encourages execution, suggesting it is standard and even telling the board to “name your price.” The developer also pressures the newly elected board to sign. Instead of signing, the board consults with their attorney. Counsel advises the board not to sign the release and recommends further investigation. Engineers are retained and identify early indicators of broader issues, including stucco cracking, water
    Protect Your Projects By Identifying and Controlling Hidden Contract Risks

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    "Multip
    Release Of “Unknown” Claim Does Not Bar Release Of “Unaccrued” Claim: Fair Or Unfair?

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    Seven Former North San Diego County Landfills are Leaking Contaminants

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    Contractor Sues for $5.7M in Pay for Iowa Jail Project

    AI Systems and the Real Estate Industry

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    Splashdown: Fire-Weakened Beijing Bridge Deck Falls Into River

    Best U.S. Home Sales Since 2007 Show Momentum in Housing Market

    Mortenson Subcontractor Fires Worker Over Meta Data Center Noose

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Microscopic Soot, Major Win: Policyholder Coverage Expands

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    HHMR: A Retrospective — Chapter One (2001–2025)

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    It’s Getting Harder and Harder to be a Concrete Supplier in California

    China Construction Bank Sued in US Over Reinsurance Fraud Losses

    Mind Those Deadlines! Party Loses Appeal of Arbitration Decision by Failing to Timely File a Petition to Vacate

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Emerging World Needs $1.5 Trillion for Green Buildings, IFC Says

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    Luxury Villa Fraudsters Jailed for Madeira Potato Field Scam

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Future Environmental Rulemaking Proceedings Listed in the Spring 2019 Unified Federal Agenda

    Rightfully Recovering Under a Coblentz Agreement

    Contract Interpretation – Determining What the Contract Requires

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Civil RICO Case Against Johnny Doc Is Challenging

    Musk’s Cousins Battle Utilities to Make Solar Rooftops Cheap

    To Arbitrate or Not to Arbitrate? That is the Question

    Rachel Reynolds Selected as Prime Member of ADTA

    Differences in Types of Damages Matter

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    The Housing Market Is Softening, But Home Depot and Lowe's Are Crushing It

    Los Angeles Wildfires Will Cause Significant Insured Losses, Ranking Amongst the Most Destructive in California's History

    Performance Bond Surety Takeover – Using Terminated Contractor To Complete The Work

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    Mind Over Matter: Court Finds Expert Opinion Based on NFPA 921 Reliable Despite Absence of Physical Testing

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    From the Ground Up

    Homeowner Survives Motion to Dismiss Depreciation Claims

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Citizen Suits and the Summer of 2022

    On Rehearing, Fifth Circuit Finds Contractual-Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Google’s Biggest Moonshot Is Its Search for a Carbon-Free Future

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    Former NYC Condo Empire Executive Arrested for Larceny, Tax Fraud

    Construction Injuries Under the Privette Doctrine. An Electrifying, but Perhaps Not Particularly Shocking, Story . . .

    Court Dismisses Cross Claims Against Utility Based on Construction Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Fourth Circuit Confirms Scope of “Witness Litigation Privilege”

    Administration Launches 'Buy Clean' Construction Materials Push

    Underpowered AC Not a Construction Defect

    Review your Additional Insured Endorsement

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Contractors Set to Implement Air Quality Upgrades for Healthier Buildings

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Reminder: You Can’t Make Others Indemnify You for Your Own Actions

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    Texas Supreme Court Rules on Contractual Liability Exclusion in Construction Cases

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    A Compilation of Quirky Insurance Claims

    Proposition 65: OEHHA to Consider Adding and Delisting Certain Chemicals of Concern