BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing Anaheim California retail construction Anaheim California casino resort Anaheim California condominiums Anaheim California institutional building Anaheim California concrete tilt-up Anaheim California custom homes Anaheim California multi family housing Anaheim California low-income housing Anaheim California parking structure Anaheim California tract home Anaheim California Medical building Anaheim California high-rise construction Anaheim California structural steel construction Anaheim California condominium Anaheim California townhome construction Anaheim California custom home Anaheim California landscaping construction Anaheim California office building Anaheim California industrial building Anaheim California hospital construction Anaheim California mid-rise construction 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

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Arbitration Clause Not Binding on Association in Construction Defect Claim

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Construction Defect Exception Does Not Lift Bar in Payment Dispute

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Continuous Trigger of Coverage Adopted for Loss Under First Party Policy

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

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

    Harmon Towers Duty to Defend Question Must Wait, Says Court

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

    Mandatory Arbitration Provision Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Utah Construction Defect Claims Dependant on Contracts

    No Resulting Loss From Deck Collapsing Due to Rot

    Former New York Governor to Head Construction Monitoring Firm

    Builder Cannot Receive Setoff in Construction Defect Case

    New Web Site Tracks Settled Construction Defect Claims

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Quarter Four a Good One for Luxury Homebuilder

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

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

    Cabinetmaker Exceeds Expectations as Conditions Improve

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says Georgia Supreme Court

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

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

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

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Insurance Firm Defends against $22 Million Claim

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Firm Sued For Construction Defects in Parking Garage

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    Washington Court Limits Lien Rights of Construction Managers

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    District Court Awards Summary Judgment to Insurance Firm in Framing Case

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    After Construction Defect Case, Repairs to Austin Building

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

    Florida: No Implied Warranties for Neighborhood Improvements

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Bars Coverage for Landslide and Water Leak

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

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

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Yellow Brass Fittings Play a Crucial Role in Baker v Castle & Cooke Homes

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    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

    Drug Company Provides Cure for Development Woes

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend in Water Intrusion Case

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

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

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

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

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

    Bill Seeks to Protect Legitimate Contractors

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Boyfriend Pleads Guilty in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam Suicide

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    New Households Moving to Apartments

    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

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

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Insurer Not Liable for Construction Defect Revealed by Woodpecker

    Insurer Has Duty to Disclose Insured's Interest In Obtaining Written Explanation of Arbitration Award

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

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

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

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

    Judge Concludes Drywall Manufacturer Sold in Florida

    Seven Tips to Manage Construction Defect Risk
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Anaheim California forensic architect architectural engineering expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect expert witness concrete failureAnaheim California forensic architect slope failure expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect construction project management expert witnessesAnaheim California forensic architect roofing construction expertAnaheim California forensic architect construction claims expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect concrete expert witness
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    May 26, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. American Building Materials, Inc., No. 8:10-CV-313-T-24-AEP (M.D. Fla. May 17, 2011), insured drywall supplier ABM was sued by general contractor KB Homes seeking damages because property damage to houses built by KB Homes using defective Chinese drywall supplied by ABM. ABM’s CGL insurer Auto-Owners defended ABM under a reservation of rights and filed suit against ABM and KB Homes seeking a judicial declaration of no to duty to defend or indemnify ABM against the KB Homes lawsuit. On cross motions for summary, the federal district trial court directed entry of judgment in favor of ABM and KB Homes and against Auto-Owners, holding that Auto-Owners had a duty to defend and indemnify ABM against the KB Homes lawsuit.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


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

    July 11, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Illinois Court of Appeals determined the insurer must defend allegations of property damage arising from faulty workmanship. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1443 (Ill. Ct. App. June, 20, 2011).

    Larsen was a subcontractor for Weather-Tite in a condominium building. Weather-Tite installed windows on the project and hired Larsen to apply sealant to the windows. The windows subsequently leaked and caused water damage within the complex.

    The homeowner’s association sued Weather-Tite for breach of express and implied warranties. Weather-Tite filed a third-party complaint against Larsen, seeking contribution and alleging that Larsen was in breach of contract by failing to add Weather-Tite as an additional insured under Larsen’s CGL policy.

    Both Weather-Tite and Larsen tendered to Larsen’s insurer. Both tenders were denied because the insurer contended the complaints alleged only construction defects, and not “property damage” or an “occurrence” within the terms of the policy.

    The insurer filed suit for a declaratory judgment. The trial court granted the insurer’s motion as to Weather-Tite, but granted Larsen’s cross-motion 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


    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Fifth Circuit Court has withdrawn its decision in Ewing Construction Company v. Amerisure Insurance Company, pending clarification from the Texas Supreme Court of its decision in Gilbert Texas Construction, L.P. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London. The Fifth Circuit had applied the Gilbert case in determining that a contractual liability exclusion barred coverage for faulty workmanship. The Insurance Journal reports that this decision was both applauded and criticized, with a concern noted that “an insurer would now have its pick of either the ‘your work’ exclusion or the contractual liability exclusion without the exception for subcontracted work.”

    The Fifth Circuit is now asking the Texas Supreme Court two questions to clarify Gilbert, which Brian S. Martin and Suzanne M. Patrick see as a sign that the Court has realized that it overly expanded the scope of the earlier ruling. A response is expected from the Texas Supreme Court by spring 2013.

    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…


    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    VegasInc.com reports that U.S. District Judge James Mahan has unsealed fourteen more criminal cases in the ongoing Las Vegas HOA corruption probe. One of the fourteen is Lisa Kim, whose Platinum Community Services managed communities in which Nancy Quon and Leon Benzer were involved.

    Two attorneys were also named. Brian Jones had previously been named in civil litigation as working to rig HOA elections in favor of the straw buyers. Jeanne Winkler had done legal work for one of the communities and for the developer before her disbarment.

    Eight of the names released were of alleged straw buyers. These individuals are said to have bought fractional shares of homes so they could stand for election on the HOA boards. One of the individuals named, Arnold Meyers, had sued the Jasmine Homeowners Association, claiming that their HOA elections were tainted. Myers claimed that homeowners received postcards stating that he did not own his condo. His suit was dropped after two homeowners claimed that their names had been forged on Meyer’s affidavits.

    Read the full story…


    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Texas construction firm, founded in 1937, filed for bankruptcy, bringing twenty-two projects to a sudden halt, and resulting in the loss of jobs for hundreds of employees. Ballenger Construction told its employees to go home, as it could not complete the jobs. In some cases, work will need to be done to ensure that the work sites do not cause public safety hazards.

    Read the full story…


    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    March 28, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Construction Law Hawaii

    Charles and Valerie Myers hired Perry Miller to build their home. Myers v. United Ohio Ins. Co., 2012 Ohio App. LEXIS 287 (Ohio Ct. App. Jan. 26, 2012). After completion of the home, Miller was again hired to construct an addition which included a full basement, staircases, bathroom, bedroom, hallway and garage.

    After the addition was completed, one of the basement walls began to crack and bow. Miller began to make repairs, but eventually stopped working on the project. Other contractors were hired to make repairs, but further problems developed. A second basement wall began to bow and crack, allowing water into the basement. The wall eventually had to be replaced. Subsequently, the roof over the addition began to leak in five or six places before the drywall could be painted. The leaks caused water stains on the drywall and caused it to separate and tear. It was discovered the roof needed to be replaced.

    The Myers sued Miller and his insurer, United Ohio Insurance Company. The trial court ruled that the policy did not provide coverage for faulty workmanship, but did provide coverage for consequential damages caused by repeated exposure to the elements. United Ohio conceded liability in the amount of $2,000 to repair water damage to the drywall. United Ohio was also found liable for $51,576, which included $31,000 to repair the roof and ceiling and $18,576 to replace the basement wall.

    Read the full story…

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


    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Nevada chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses has said that Nevada’s construction defect and minimum wage laws are hampering job growth. The organization conducted a survey, and although only about two percent of the members responded, they passed the opinions of the group on to Governor Brian Sandoval. Sandoval has said, according to the report by Fox News Reno, that he wants the state to be more business friendly. He supports reforms to Nevada’s construction defect laws, saying that he’d “like to see some reform” on the issue of mandatory attorney’s fees.

    Randi Thompson, the spokesperson for the Nevada chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said that members of her organization would like to see current Nevada construction defect law revoked. She described current law as “driven towards lawyers and not toward protecting consumers.”

    Read the full story…


    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Minnesota has replaced its Independent Contractor Exemption Certificate program with the Contractor Registration Pilot Project, according to an article in the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library by Michael B. Lapicola. Mr. Lapicola notes that “it will be a violation of the law to contract with or perform construction services for another person without first being registered with the Pilot Project, or to contract with or pay another person to perform construction services if the other person is not registered with the Pilot Project. There are, however, quite a few exceptions, including those who are currently registered with the earlier program. Additionally, independent contractors who do not register can avoid the fine (up to $2,000) by registering within thirty days of fines being levied. Individuals and firms that do not perform building construction or improvements are exempt from the hiring aspects of the statute.

    Minnesota’s goal is to “assist state agencies to investigate employee misclassification in the building industry.” Employees of construction firms do not individually register. Rather, the intent of the of law is to stop those who would “require any individual through coercion, misrepresentation or fraudulent means to adopt independent contractor status” or to “knowingly misrepresent or misclassify an individual as an independent contractor.”

    Read the full story…


    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

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

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

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

    Read the full story…

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


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

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Jeff City Industries was the general contractor for a sewer system improvement project in Branson, Missouri. Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. United HRB Gen. Contractors, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145666 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 19, 2011). Branson sued Jeff City, alleging breach of the construction contract for the project. The claims included improperly bedded sewer piping, improper aligning portions of trenching for the sewer piping, improper service line connections to the sewer piping, etc.

    Read the full story…

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


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

    June 17, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    Well, it finally made it. The most important Washington lien case of recent memory was argued in front of the Washington Supreme Court on Tuesday, June 14, 2011. So, what should we all expect?

    As I was reading through my RSS feeds this afternoon ? I was stopped dead in my tracks. Williams v . Athletic Field, the Division II case that has been a frequent topic here on Builders Counsel, has finally been argued before the Supreme Court. All of you who have been anxiously awaiting this day, you can check out the Supreme Court submissions by following this link.

    The Williams case has been the center of attention for construction lawyers and construction organizations over the past year. Some have called for complete lien law reform, others have tried to patch a hole in the law. Now, we can expect a ruling from the highest court in the state. That ruling will have a major impact on whether the Legislature feels compelled to change lien law.

    Read the full story…

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


    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    May 18, 2011 — May 18, 2011 - CDJ Staff

    In an unpublished decision, the California Fourth Appellate District Court has reversed the judgment of Judge Linda B. Quinn of the Superior Court of San Diego. In the case Inland California, Inc. v. G.A. Abell, Inland, a general contractor had subcontracted with Apache Construction and Precision Electric Company (G.A. Abell).

    Apache alleged that extra demolition and drywall work was needed due to Precision’s electrical work. Inland tendered a defense of Apache’s claims. However, Precision did not provide any defense. Inland withheld payment from Precision.

    At trial, Inland “conceded Precision earned the $98,000 in progress payments Inland withheld.” They were obligated to additionally pay Precision’s costs and attorney fees.

    The Fourth Appellate District court has overturned this and remanded the case back to the lower court. The judges determined that Precision was obligated to defend itself against the claims raised by Apache and therefore vacated the judgment against Inland.

    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…


    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    June 7, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Under a new law, Texas HB 274, the Texas Supreme Court will be making rules for motions to dismiss and to expedite suits of less than $100,000. The law also contains two “loser pays” provisions. If a lawsuit is found dismissed for having “no basis in fact or law,” the losing side must pay attorney costs. The other provision caps award of attorney fees if plaintiffs reject settlement offers. Texas Lawyer quotes Houston attorney Mike Gallagher as saying this will affect “the practice of everyone who handles significant lawsuits.”

    Gregory Marcum, whose practice includes construction defect litigation, plans to contact insurance companies, as the new law may save them money. “It will definitely be a factor in the defense strategy for handling a case.” He notes that “any insurance carrier would want that done.”

    Marcum notes that the offer-of-settlement rules only apply when cases go to trial. “Almost all cases settle.”

    Read HB 274

    Read the full story…


    Construction Defects as Occurrences, Better Decided in Law than in Courts

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Construction defect claims are now occurrences for insurance purposes in four states, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, and South Carolina, yet there are still frustrations for commercial general liability policyholders. Business Insurance describes court decisions on whether construction defect claims are covered as “incongruous,” and this drives up coverage and litigation costs. Construction firms often find they are defending themselves on two fronts, both the construction defect claim and also whether their insurance covers it.

    Frank Armstrong, the Senior Vice President and National Director of Construction Claims for Willis North America says that the problem starts with the word “occurrence,” as various state courts have different interpretations of the word. “Certain pieces of it don’t fit well, at lest according to some courts in the country, with coverage for construction defect risks.”

    Another insurance executive, Julian Ehlich, the Senior Vice President of Claims for Aon Risk Solutions’ construction services group notes that “jurisdictions differ, so policyholders don’t know what they’re going to get.”

    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…


    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    November 18, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    Exclusions barred the homeowners from recovering for losses caused by Chinese drywall in their home. Ross v. C. Adams Const. & Design, L.L.C., 2011 La. App. LEXIS 769 (La. Ct. App., released for publication Oct. 5, 2011).

    Two years after purchasing their home, the Rosses began experiencing chronic malfunctions in the heating, ventilation and air conditioning system. After discovering the presence of gypsum drywall, or "Chinese drywall", they submitted a claim to their insurer, Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company, for damages caused by the Chinese drywall. Louisiana Citizens denied the claim.

    The Rosses sued. The trial court granted summary judgment to Louisiana Citizens based upon exclusions in the policy.

    On appeal, the appellate court first agreed the Rosses had sustained a direct physical loss. The inherent qualities of the Chinese drywall created a physical loss to the home and the drywall had to be removed and replaced.

    Read the full story…

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