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


    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.


    Construction 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
    http://www.desertchapter.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501


    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biasc.org

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614
    http://www.biaoc.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
    http://www.biabuild.com

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355


    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535



    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

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

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

    Construction Defects and Contractor-Owners

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Builder Cannot Receive Setoff in Construction Defect Case

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Condominium Communities Must Complete Construction Defect Repairs, Says FHA

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Hospital Construction Firm Settles Defect Claim for $1.1 Million

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

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

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

    Ghost Employees Steal Jobs from Legit Construction Firms

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Homeowner Loses Suit against Architect and Contractor of Resold Home

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

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

    Construction Bright Spot in Indianapolis

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Insurance Firm Under No Duty to Defend in Hawaii Construction Defect Case

    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

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

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    The Complete and Accepted Work Doctrine and Construction Defects

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Differing Rulings On Construction Defect Claims Leave Unanswered Questions For Builders, and Construction Practice Groups. Impact to CGL Carriers, General Contractors, Builders Remains Unclear

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Claims Under Colorado Defect Action Reform Act Count as Suits

    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Connecticut Gets Medieval All Over Construction Defects

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

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

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

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

    Preparing for Trial on a Cause of Action for Violation of Civil Code section 895, et seq.

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

    No Coverage for Property Damage That is Limited to Work Completed by Subcontractor

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Tennessee Court: Window Openings Too Small, Judgment Too Large

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

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

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

    Construction Defect Litigation at San Diego’s Alicante Condominiums?

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

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

    New Apartment Tower on the Rise in Seattle

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

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

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

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    Construction Case Alert: Appellate Court Confirms Engineer’s Duty to Defend Developer Arises Upon Tender of Indemnity Claim

    New Web Site Tracks Settled Construction Defect Claims

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    Wine without Cheese? (Why a construction contract needs an order of precedence clause)(Law Note)

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

    One World Trade Center Due to Be America’s Tallest and World’s Priciest
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging 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.

    Anaheim California forensic architect construction defect expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect delay claim expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect roofing and waterproofing expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect construction safety expertAnaheim California forensic architect expert witness concrete failureAnaheim California forensic architect defective construction expertAnaheim California forensic architect expert witness structural engineer
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Vertex Pharmaceuticals is poised to become the holder of Boston’s biggest commercial lease, paying $72.5 million for 1.1 million square feet on Boston’s waterfront. Vertex’s new buildings are still under construction, but the plans have spurred other development in the Fan Pier area, according to the New York Times. The Times quotes Mary A. Burke, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston that the Vertex project gives “a big push” to the “momentum for economic growth.”

    The Fallon Company is building Vertex’s new laboratory and office space. They are separately planning to build a high-rise with 150 luxury condominium units. According to Joseph Fallon, the chief executive and president of the Fallon Company, there is already a waiting list of 50 buyers for the condominiums.

    Across the street from the Vertex site, a group including Morgan Stanley and Boston Global Investors is planning a 23-block mixed use project that would include 1.2 million square feet of retail space. Additionally, the New England Development and the Hanover Group is building a 356-unit apartment building at the adjacent Pier 4.

    Read the full story…


    After Construction Defect Case, Repairs to Austin Building

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Austin Business Journal reports that remediation is about to begin on Met Center 10, a building that was “at the center of a complex structural defect case.” Claims were made that Grubb & Ellis failed to disclose known structural defects to a group of investors who purchased the building. The brokerage was ordered to pay $6.75 million. Repairs will take an estimated six months at a cost of $3.7 million.

    Read the full story…


    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    June 30, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    One June 27, the US Court of Appeals has rejected an appeal from Mid-Continent Casualty Company. Mid-Continent had appealed a summary judgment granted to Titan Construction Company.

    Titan Construction had built condominiums for the Williamsburg Condominium Association, which later filed a construction defect lawsuit against Titan and other defendants. Titan settled with the developer, Kennydale, assigning its rights against Mid-Continent to Kennydale. Mid-Continent filed suit, claiming that “it had no obligation to indemnify or defend Titan, Kennydale, or various other defendants.” The district court found in favor of Mid-Continent, granting a summary judgment, concluding that Titan’s insurance covered “occurrences,” and none had taken place.

    On appeal, the court found that the negligent construction of the condominiums constituted an “occurrence” The case was remanded and the district court this time found in favor of Titan, “concluding that Mid-Continent failed to raise a triable issue as to the applicability of the remaining policy exclusions.

    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has now affirmed that decision and Titan’s summary judgment stands.

    Read the court’s decision…


    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    April 25, 2012 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Cousel

    Contractual fairness ? it is part of my mantra. If you read the blog, you probably know that I preach brevity, balance and clarity in contracting. The State of Washington did well to finally eliminate something that has angered me for quite some time ? unfair indemnification.

    One of my favorite construction contract revisions is mutual indemnification. Many “up the chain” contractors and owners are going to stick you with a unilateral indemnification clause that protects them for just about everything, including their own fumbling of a project. Adding mutual indemnification provides some balance, and keeps parties reliant upon each other for success on the job site.

    Read the full story…

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


    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Simms v. Nance Construction. After a fire damaged his home, Jerry Simms discovered some construction defects in the work of the builder, Nance Construction. Nance Construction completed the home in 2000 and it was damaged by fire in 2001. In the course of Simms’ suit against his neighbor, “defense experts opined both that Dusty Creek had negligently repaired the damage to Simms’ residence and that many defects found in the houses were the result of defects in the original construction.” Nance offered to make roof repairs. Simms responded with a list of “numerous construction defects,” stating this was “not a comprehensive and final list of items.” Nance offered to repair some while disputing others. Simms entered a lawsuit against Nance and other parties.

    Nance first sought a summary judgment, “asserting that Simms had failed to adequately disclose the repairs for which he sought to hold Nance responsible.” The court denied this. It also would not allow Nance to introduce evidence that Simms had been denied a license by the Arizona Department of Gaming over “questionable business practices, illegal activities, and financial transactions with a person purportedly involved in organized crime.”

    During the suit, Simms contracted with Advanced Repair Technologies “for repairs that included a complete remodel of the roof and the exterior stucco system.” Nance later claimed that the cost of ART’s repair was unreasonable, claiming that it should have cost about $600,000 instead of the $1.5 million for which Simms contracted. The jury found against Nance, with a judgment of $870,200 of which half was due to the roofing subcontractor.

    After the verdict, Nash moved for a new trial, stating that the jury should have heard expert testimony on whether the contract price was reasonable. Nance also “argued that the trial court had erred in refusing to allow Nance to impeach Simms’ credibility with his purported prior acts of dishonesty.” These motions were denied and Nance appealed.

    The appeals court upheld the trial court on all counts. The court found that, despite the contention made by Nance, the jury had sufficient information to determine if the cost of the repairs were reasonable. The court also found that Simms had given Nance an opportunity to propose repairs. The law, however, “does not require the Plaintiff to accept an offer for repairs,” adding that “the record makes clear that the parties were far apart in their belief of the nature of repairs necessary.” Nor did the court find that Nance should have been allowed to introduce evidence to impeach Simms’ credibility.

    Although judgment of the lower court was affirmed, the court took the discretion to decline to award attorneys’ fees to Simms, although he was awarded costs.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Condo Owners Worried Despite Settlement

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    KB Homes may have settled a construction defect claim with Willowbrook Condominium Association, but some of the owners are still concerned about the repair process. The Sarasota, Florida Herald Tribune reports that one homeowner’s living room “ends with a white tarp.” He told the paper, “We feel like we’re not even owners of our own home.” A neighbor wondered “what happens when people get displaced while their homes are gutted?”

    As part of the agreement, the condominium association will be selecting a contractor to repair the problems, while the cost will be paid by KB Homes. Nevertheless, at least one owner fears for their ability to resell his home, noting that even after repairs have been made, “do you think someone’s going to come in here and buy?”

    Read the full story…


    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    February 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A judge has ruled that a plaintiff can go forward with her suit that she was injured by a defective archway during a birthday party. A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeals issued this ruling on January 23, 2012, in the case of Trujillo v. Cosio.

    Ms. Trujillo attended a birthday party at the home of Maria Cosio and Joel Verduzco. A piñata was hung between a tree and a brick archway. Ms. Trujillo went to get candy that had fallen from the piñata, during which the archway fell on her hand. Subsequent examination of the archway showed that it had not been “properly anchored to the supporting pillars to protect the arch from falling.”

    Ms. Cosio and Mr. Verduzco argued that they could not have been aware of the defective nature of the archway’s construction, as it had been built at the request of the prior property owner. The structure was constructed without building permits. Mark Burns, a civil engineer testifying for the plaintiff, said that “a reasonable property owner would have thoroughly tested the archway to ensure it was capable of withstanding such horizontal forces before allowing children to enter into the area.” Mr. Burns noted that twenty rope pulls would have been sufficient to demonstrate the structure’s instability.

    The trial court rejected Mr. Burn’s statements, finding that the respondents did not have any knowledge of the defect and that a visual inspection should have sufficed. The court noted that this a triable issue, whether visual inspection suffices, or whether the property owners should have done as Mr. Burns suggested and yank a rope twenty times. The court noted that “although a jury may ultimately disagree with Burn’s opinion, it was supported by sufficient foundation and was not speculative.”

    The opinion was written by Judge Flier, with Judges Rubin and Grimes concurring.

    Read the court’s decison…


    Largest Per Unit Settlement Ever in California Construction Defect Case?

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    BusinessWire reports that the Chelsea Court Homeowners Association has settled their construction defect case for $5.4 million. That works out to $169,000 per unit, which BusinessWire describes as “California’s largest per-unit recovery known to be on record to date.”

    Most of the money in the settlement is coming from insurance companies for the builder and thirteen subcontractors. Issues included roof and window leaks, deck failures, and unsafe walkways.

    Read the full story...


    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    November 18, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Associated Builders and Contractors released their analysis of construction work under contract and found that there was no increase in construction backlog from the second quarter of 2011. There was still improvement, however, over 2010, as the third quarter backlog is 16.3 percent higher than that of a year ago.

    The current backlog is 8.1 months, which according to Anirban Basu, the chief economist of the ABC, “is consistent with flat construction spending.” He noted that less than 8 months indicated a decline.

    Read the full story…


    No “Special Relationship” in Oregon Construction Defect Claim

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Writing on his firm’s blog, Justin Stark discusses recent changes in construction defect claims in Oregon where, as he points out, “courts in Oregon have been lowering legal hurdles that construction defect plaintiffs must overcome in bringing their cases.” He cites a case in which water damage was discovered more than six years after construction was complete. The owners claimed breach of contract and negligence. The trial court found for the contractor, who argued “that there was no ‘special relationship’ with the owners that could support the negligence claim.”

    This was overturned on appeal, with the court concluding that if there was a violation of the building code, then the negligence claim could stand. This was appealed to the Oregon Supreme court which concluded that “neither a special relationship nor a statutory standard of care, such as the building code, is necessary to bring a negligence claim here.”

    Stark notes that “many forms of construction contract incorporate the phrase ‘workmanlike,’ which implicates the ‘common law standard of care’ in negligence law.

    Read the full story…


    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    September 1, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The underlying plaintiff’s allegations contended the contractor was in breach of contract for construction defects caused in building her home. Accordingly, the court found no coverage.See Nat’l Builders and Contractors Ins. Co. v. Slocum, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81694 (S.D. Miss. July 26, 2011).

    Slocum Construction LLC sold a home it built to Laura Peterson. Subsequently, Peterson filed suit, alleging a breach of the contract and seeking rescission and cancellation of the contract. Peterson further alleged at least thirty-three specific defects in the construction of the house.

    Slocum tendered to its insurer, National Builders and Contractors Insurance Company (NBCI). NBCI filed suit for a declaratory judgment.

    Read the full story…

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


    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    An attorney for Tutor Perini, George Ogilvie, has said that he will appeal to the state Supreme Court to stop Clark County District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez’s ruling from taking effect. She has given the go-ahead to MGM Resorts and CityCenter to implode the building. Ogilvie described the demolition as “a do-over at Perini’s expense” in protesting Gonzalez’s order. Gonzalez has said that she will instruct jurors that the demolition was an admission that the building was badly built. Ogilvie says this is “allowing MGM to bury its mistakes.”

    MGM claims that it is only following the directive of county safety officials. “When Clark County demanded that CityCenter abate the potential hazard created by faulty construction at the Harmon, we determined that demolition is the surest, safest and fasted way to do so.”

    Read the full story…


    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Thomas Herink has been ordered to repay more than $5 million to his victims and will be serving three years of probation after 18 months in jail for defrauding banks and insurance companies, according to a report in the Insurance Journal. Herink falsified financial statements to lenders and insurers so that his company, Golf Services Group Inc. could participate in construction projects.

    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…


    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    September 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    A summary judgment was affirmed in the case of Brown v. Farmers Group, by the California Court of Appeals. The Browns bought a new home in Oakley, California. At the time, they signed disclosure statement “acknowledging that the area around their home experienced gusty winds and would be in development for years to come, which might result in dust and airborne mold.”

    The Browns found an unusual amount of dust in their home, which became worse when they ran their heating and air conditioning system. Shelia Brown was later diagnosed with chronic valley fever, which was attributed to airborne mold. The Browns contacted Farmers which investigated the house. Although the adjustor from Farmers said the Browns would be covered, Farmers denied the claim.

    After the Browns moved out of the house, an inspector found that the HVAC line in the attic was disconnected, sending dust into the home. The Browns brought action against Mid-Century Insurance, which managed the policy, and Farmers. The identified the HVAC defect, window problems, and valley fever as causes, suing for breach of contact, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    The court rejected all these claims. The policy with Farmers excluded losses due to defective construction. This ruled out the faulty HVAC system and any problems there might have been from the windows. The policy also specifically excluded losses from contamination, fungi, pathogens, and noxious substances. The court further found that the adjustor’s opinion was irrelevant to the question of what the policy actually covered. Finally, the court found no evidence of intentional infliction of emotional stress.

    On review, the appeals court upheld the trial court’s conclusions and affirmed the summary judgment.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    American Openings, a Tuscon-based window manufacturer, has responded to the loss of its sales of windows for new home construction by moving into new markets. The Arizona Daily Star reports that American Openings used to see providing windows for new homes as half their business. Now, Tom Regina, the founder and president says “single family is just dead.”

    Their products are insulated windows, designed to comply with Energy Star standards. Without new homes being built, now the company is focusing on homeowners and building owners looking for more energy efficient windows. As the windows have two or three panes and special coatings, homeowners using them are eligible for tax credits.

    One of their newer products combines their energy-saving coatings with “break resistant” glass. The article notes that the windows repel “all but the most determined burglars.” However, the company is still awaiting special equipment to cut the glass.

    Read the full story...


    2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar – Recap

    June 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff
    Event exhibitors and sponsors contribute to an informative and engaging environment
    Event exhibitors and sponsors contribute to an informative and engaging environment

    This year’s meeting was the best yet for the industry-leading construction defect and claims event.

    This year’s seminar concluded on May 13, 2011 with the Construction Defect Community Charitable Foundation Golf Tournament, held at Strawberry Farms Golf Course.

    The Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim, California was the place where more than 1,500 attendees convened for two days of professional development activities and seminars that included CLE workshops and panel discussions of special interest to legal and insurance professionals concerned with construction defect and claims litigation. Key events included “Challenges for Experts in Construction Defect Claims and Litigation,” “Keeping Up with Construction Defect Coverage,” and “Tips for Avoiding the ‘Perfect Storm’ in Handling of Wrap Claims.”

    Supporting the golf tournament at the 15th hole
    Supporting the golf tournament at the 15th hole

    This year’s Ollie award was given to George D. Calkins II, Esq. The West Coast Casualty Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence was named in honor of the late Judge Jerrold S. Oliver, and recognizes an individual who is outstanding or has contributed to the betterment of the construction community.

    In addition to being the most comprehensive professional development seminar in the area of construction defects, this year’s seminar was equally valuable as a networking opportunity for members of the industry. People participated in professional development events during the day and then continued networking in the evening at numerous social events. The Lawn Party as well as the legendary Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman events were very well attended. Additional valuable networking events were hosted by a number of industry professionals at the House of Blues, and Tortilla Joe’s.

    As of this writing the 2011, West Coast Casualty's Construction Defect Seminar has applied for or has already received the following continuing education accreditation in the following areas;

    Read the full story…

    For more information about next year’s event, visit West Coast Casualty.


    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    April 7, 2011 — April 7, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011 (H. R. 1309) has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services—the first step in the legislative process. The bill, if passed, would extend the program to September 30, 2016. It is currently slated to be terminated September 30 of this year. The bill also contains changes to premium rates, mapping protocols, and privatization initiatives.

    H. R. 1309 has garnered the support of several Insurance organizations. Leigh Ann Pusey, president and CEO of the American Insurance Association (AIA), sent a letter of support to the Chair and Ranking member of the House Financial Services Subcommittee. “AIA has advocated for a long term reauthorization of the NFIP to protect consumers and help increase stability for real estate transactions and policyholders,” Pusey said. “AIA believes the five-year extension contained in HR 1309, will provide certainty in the flood program thereby increasing consumer and business confidence in the NFIP.”

    Jimi Grande, senior vice president of federal and political affairs for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) spoke out in support of the bill. “For the NFIP to survive, the prices for flood insurance must reflect the actual costs of flood risk for a property,” Grande said. “HR 1309 will provide that transparency. In addition, the Technical Mapping Advisory Council will give communities a voice in the flood mapping process, fostering a better understanding of what flood maps represent and how they are made.”

    Read H. R. 1309...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...
    Read the NAMIC Press Release...