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

    Crane Dangles and So Do Insurance Questions

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

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

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

    Changes to Arkansas Construction and Home Repair Laws

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Court Clarifies Sequence in California’s SB800

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

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

    California Supreme Court Finds Associations Bound by Member Arbitration Clauses

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    The Complete and Accepted Work Doctrine and Construction Defects

    West Hollywood Building: Historic Building May Be Defective

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Contractor Sues Supplier over Defective Products

    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Recent Case Brings Clarity and Questions to Statute of Repose Application

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

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

    California Posts Nation’s Largest Gain in Construction Jobs

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Steps to Defending against Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Insurer Settles on Construction Defect Claim

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

    One to Watch: Case Takes on Economic Loss Rule and Professional Duties

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

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

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Damage During Roof Repairs Account for Three Occurrences

    Claims Under Colorado Defect Action Reform Act Count as Suits

    SB800 Cases Approach the Courts

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

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

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

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    One Colorado Court Allows Negligence Claim by General Contractor Against Subcontractor

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

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

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Loss Caused by Seepage of Water Not Covered

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    After Breaching its Duty to Defend, Insurer Must Indemnify

    Construction Defect Destroys Home, Forty Years Later

    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

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

    Construction Defect Not Occurrences, Says Hawaii Court

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

    Architect Not Liable for Balcony’s Collapse

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

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

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Windows and Lawsuits Fly at W Hotel

    OSHA Cites Construction Firm for Safety Violations

    Minnesota Starts Wide-Ranging Registration of Contractors

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Arizona Court of Appeals Decision in $8.475 Million Construction Defect Class Action Suit

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Insurers’ Summary Judgment Award Based on "Your Work" Exclusion

    Construction on the Rise in Denver

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

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Defective Grout May Cause Trouble for Bridges

    Sometimes It’s Okay to Destroy Evidence

    Geometrically Defined Drainage Cavities in EIFS as a Guard Against Defects

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    Las Vegas Home Builder Still in Bankruptcy

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    No-Show Contractor Can’t Hide from Construction Defect Claim

    Window Manufacturer Weathers Recession by Diversifying

    Florida trigger

    Ensuing Losses From Faulty Workmanship Must be Covered
    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 building consultant expertAnaheim California forensic architect reconstruction expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect architectural expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect expert witness structural engineerAnaheim California forensic architect consulting architect expert witnessAnaheim California forensic architect structural concrete expertAnaheim California forensic architect roofing construction expert
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Court Sends Construction Defect Case from Kansas to Missouri

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The United State Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has ruled in Mid-Continent Casualty Company v. The Village at Deer Creek Homeowners Association. The prior case was heard by the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. In this appeal, Mid-Continent sought a declaratory judgement. The Village at Deer Creek Homeowners Association moved to dismiss, and the district court had granted this, giving jurisdiction to the Missouri state courts.

    The homeowners association had sued Greater Midwest Builders, Ltd., who had constructed the subdivision, in the Kansas state courts. The suit ended with a verdict against Greater Midwest for more than $7 million. The association and other plaintiffs in that case filed for equitable garnishment against State Auto, Mid-Continent, and Greater Midwest. State Auto removed the garnishment action to federal court in Missouri. Mid-Continent moved to sever the actions against it and transfer the case to the District of Kansas.

    Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in the Western District of Missouri. A second garnishment action followed in which Mid-Continent was named as an additional plaintiff. State Auto again removed to the Western District of Missouri, while Mid-Continent moved to sever and transfer to the District of Kansas. The Kansas court granted the association’s motion to dismiss.

    In the appeal, Mid-Continent sought a declaratory judgment. This was denied by the appeals court. The district court “concluded that the Missouri courts were better situated to provide complete relief to all parties involved in the coverage dispute.” The appeals court affirmed the association’s movement to dismiss. Mid-Continent’s motion was denied as moot.

    Read the court's decision…


    A Lien Might Just Save Your Small Construction Business

    April 4, 2011 — Douglas Reiser in the Builders Counsel Blog

    Many owners incorrectly believe that payment to the general contractor gets the owner off the hook for payment to subcontractors and suppliers. This assumption sometimes fosters the irresponsible owner, who fails to ensure that everyone is getting paid. Fortunately for those contractors further down the contracting chain, this assumption is incorrect.

    Suppliers and subcontractors can file a lien to secure payment for their labor and materials. A filing party must offer proper notice (if applicable) and file an adequate and timely lien in the County where the work is performed. You can read our earlier posts on these topics by following this link.

    A lien notice and a lien put an owner on notice that your business has provided labor and/or materials for the improvement of the owner’s property (See RCW 60.04.031 for more info). If the owner fails to take care to ensure that your business is paid the law mandates that the owner may have to pay twice.

    Read the full story...

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


    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    May 27, 2011 — CDCoverage.com

    In Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Overlook, LLC, No. 4:10cv69 (E.D. Va. May 13, 2011), homeowner Edmonds sued insured developer/general contractor Overlook seeking damages resulting from defective Chinese drywall installed in Edmonds’ home. Overlook’s CGL insurer Nationwide defended Overlook under a reservation of rights and filed a declaratory judgment action. The federal district trial court granted Nationwide’s motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    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…


    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    September 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals has upheld a summary judgment in the case of Franklin v. Mitchell. Walter Mitchell, doing business as Southern Classic Construction built a new home for the Franklins. The Franklins moved into the home in October 2001. In April 2006 they discovered sagging floors in both the bathroom and kitchen. They contacted Mitchell who suggested the flooring might be defective. The Franklins spent eight months attempting to contact the flooring manufacturer.

    In March 2007, the Franklins had the home inspected. The sagging was determined to be due to a loss of strength in the decking because of condensation from the air conditioning system. Air returns were not properly sealed and drawing moisture into the structure. There was mold on the decking and floor joints.

    When Mitchell was contacted by the Franklins, he told them his one-year warranty had expired but had the HVAC subcontractor, Southern Mechanical Heating & Air (owned by Mitchell’s father, Jim Mitchell), look at the situation. SMHA replaced and braced subfloors. Later, they entered the crawl space to tape ducts, seal the air return, and insulate the air vent housing. The Franklins were not satisfied with the repairs, as not all the ducts were taped, nor were the air vent housings insulated.

    Franklin complained to Walter Mitchell who again cited his one-year warranty. Jim Mitchell said he would not report complaints to his insurer, stating that the repairs were unnecessary, that the work had been done correctly in the first place, and it was only done at the request of Walter Mitchell.

    In February 2009, the Franklins sued Walker Mitchell. Mitchell denied the claims, citing in part the statute of limitations. Mitchell also filed complaints against three subcontractors, including his father’s firm. Mitchell received a summary judgment as the case started after Alabama’s six-year statute of limitations.

    The appeals court rejected the Franklin’s argument that the claim of damage did not start until they were aware it was due to a construction defect. The court noted that as Walter Mitchell was licensed as a “residential home builder, the statute the Franklins cite did not apply, as it concerns architects, engineers, and licensed general contactors.”

    Nor did they feel that Mitchells’ claim that his warranty had expired were sufficient to override the statute of limitations, quoting an earlier case, “Vague assurances do not amount to an affirmative inducement to delay filing suit.” Their claim of subsequent negligent repairs was rejected because Mitchell did not direct the specific actions taken by his father’s firm.

    Read the court’s decision…


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

    March 17, 2011 — By Shaun McParland Baldwin, March 17, 2011

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana recently addressed the “Montrose” language added to the CGL ISO form in 2001 in the context of a construction defect claim where a fractured storm drain caused significant flooding a year after the drain was damaged. The insuring agreement requires that “bodily injury or “property damage” be caused by an occurrence and that the “bodily injury or “property damage” occur during the policy period. The Montrose language adds that the insurance applies only if, prior to the policy period, no insured knew that the “bodily injury or “property damage” had occurred in whole or in part. Significantly, it also states that any “bodily injury” or “property damage” which occurs during the policy period and was not, prior to the policy period known to have occurred, includes a continuation, change or resumption of that “bodily injury” or “property damage” after the end of the policy period.

    In Grange Mutual Cas. Co. v. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co., No. 29D04-0706-PL-1112 (Ct. App. IN March 15, 2011), http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03151109ehf.pdf, Sullivan was the General Contractor for a school construction project. Its subcontractor, McCurdy, installed the storm drain pipes. One of the storm pipes was fractured in 2005 while McCurdy was doing its installation work. More than a year later, the school experienced significant water damage due to flooding. It was later discovered that the flooding was due to the fractured storm drain. Sullivanrsquo;s insurer paid $146,403 for the water damage. That insurer brought a subrogation claim against McCurdy and its two insurers: West Bend and Grange. West Bend had issued CGL coverage to McCurdy while the construction was ongoing, including the date in which the storm pipe was fractured. Grange issued CGL coverage to McCurdy at the time of the flooding. Those two carriers jointly settled the subrogation claim and then litigated which insurer actually owed coverage for the loss. Significantly, the loss that was paid included only damages from the flooding, not any damages for the cost of repairing the pipe.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Shaun McParland Baldwin of Tressler LLP. Ms Baldwin can be contacted at sbaldwin@tresslerllp.com


    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A school district in northeastern Pennsylvania has retained legal services as they approach the end of a construction project. The Mid Valley School Board cited concerns about the project’s budget, but Randy Parry, Superintendent of Mid Valley schools referenced “possible litigation at the end of the project.” Mr. Parry told the Scranton Times Tribune that construction delays could be a reason for litigation.

    In addition to approving an additional $20,000 for legal representation, the board also approved $21,579 for additional project costs.

    Read the full story…


    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…


    Florida trigger

    May 18, 2011 — May 18, 2011 - CDCoverage.com

    In Johnson-Graham-Malone, Inc. v. Austwood Enterprises, Inc., No. 16-2009-CA-005750-XXXX-MA (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct. Duval County, April 29, 2011), insured JGM was the general contractor for an apartment project completed in 1998. In 2007, the project owner sued JGM seeking damages for defective construction resulting in moisture penetration property damage. JGM tendered its defense to Amerisure. Amerisure denied a defense. JGM defended and settled the underlying suit and then filed suit against Amerisure seeking recovery of defense and settlement costs. The trial court granted JGM’s motion for partial summary judgment. The court first addressed Amerisure’s duty to defend. Applying Florida law, the court held that, although the underlying complaint alleged that the property damage was not discovered until after expiration of the Amerisure policies

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com


    The King of Construction Defect Scams

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Echoing Businessweek, the Las Vegas Sun agrees that the Nevada HOA scandal is the “king of all Vegas real estate scams,” and says that the Nevada legislatures should take action. The Sun notes that the case involves only 12 out of 2,356 HOAs in Southern Nevada.

    To date, 25 people have plead guilty in the case. At the center were an attorney and contractor who allegedly referred work to each other. To enable this, they assembled a wider conspiracy of people who enriched by the process. In the words of the Sun, those involved “upended the concept of a ‘common interest’ community.”

    Read the full story…


    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    June 15, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Sunland Group, the developer, is objecting to claims that it is responsible for corrosion damage in a residential building in Gold Coast, Australia, as reported in the Courier & Mail. Residents of Q1, the world’s tallest residential tower, are suing the developer, claiming that defects and corrosion “compromise the long-term durability and appearance of” the six-year-old building.

    The developer has not only denied that there are defects in the building, but has also stated that the construction contract “did not warrant that the construction would be defects-free.” Sunland claimed that corrosion was due to the homeowners association having “failed to carry out the maintenance requirements.”

    Repair of the building is expected to cost millions of dollars. Sunland denies that it should pay any of that.

    Read the full story…


    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    May 24, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Judge Patricia J. Cottrell, ruling on the case Roger Wilkes, et al. v. Shaw Enterprises, LLC, in the Tennessee Court of Appeals, upheld the trial court’s conclusion that “the builder constructed the house in accordance with good building practices even though it was not in strict conformance with the building code.” However, Judge Cottrell directed the lower court to “award to Appellants reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in their first appeal, as determined by the trial court.”

    Judge Cottrell cited in her opinion the contract which specified that the house would be constructed “in accordance with good building practices.” However, after the Wilkes discovered water leakage, the inspections revealed that “that Shaw had not installed through-wall flashing and weep holes when the house was built.” The trial court concluded that:

    “Separate and apart from the flashing and weep holes, the trial court concluded the Wilkeses were entitled to recover damages for the other defects they proved based on the cost of repair estimates introduced during the first and second trials, which the court adjusted for credibility reasons. Thus, the trial court recalculated the amount the Wilkeses were entitled to recover and concluded they were entitled to $17,721 for the value of repairs for defects in violation of good business practices, and an additional 15%, or $2,658.15, for management, overhead, and profit of a licensed contractor. This resulted in a judgment in the amount of $20,370.15. The trial court awarded the Wilkeses attorneys” fees through the Page 9 first trial in the amount of $5,094.78 and discretionary costs in the amount of $1,500. The total judgment following the second trial totaled $26,973.93.”

    In this second appeal, Judge Cottrell concluded, that “the trial court thus did not have the authority to decide the Wilkeses were not entitled to their attorneys” fees and costs incurred in the first appeal.”

    Read the court’s decision


    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    OSHA announced that its current rules on fall protection for residential construction will remain in place until September 15, 2012. The current measures became effective in June 2011. Under the new rules, falls must be prevented by fall protection measures unless the measures can be shown to be unfeasible or even hazardous.

    Under the extension of the temporary enforcement measures, contractors who ask for compliance assistance with OSHA are given top priority and penalties can be reduced. OSHA has conducted more than 1,000 outreach sessions on the new rules.

    Read the full story…


    A Performance-Based Energy Code in Seattle: Will It Save Existing Buildings?

    August 11, 2011 — Douglas Reiser, Builders Counsel

    The City of Seattle has one of the most stringent energy codes in the nation. Based upon the Washington State Energy Code (which has been embroiled in litigation over its high standards), the code demands a lot from commercial developers. But, does it prevent developers from saving Seattle?s classic and old buildings? Perhaps.

    The general compliance procedure requires buildings to be examined during the permitting process. This means that buildings are examined before they begin operating. The procedure is not malleable and is applicable to all buildings, old and new, big and small.

    The downside of this procedure is that it eliminates awarding compliance to those buildings exhibiting a number of passive features, such as siting, thermal mass, and renewable energy production. This problem has prevented a number of interesting and architecturally pleasing existing building retrofits from getting off the ground. The cost of complying with the current system can be 20% more, and it might prevent builders from preserving a building?s historical integrity.

    Read the full story…

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

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Glen Ellyn Park District has filed suit against multiple firms over the leaks in the Ackerman Sports and Fitness Center. The district alleges at least twenty leaks can be found throughout the facility. In order to prevent further damage, they have put in a system of “buckets, tarps and flexible piping.”

    According to the Chicago Daily Herald, the park district has most recently added the project construction manager, the building designer, and insurer that issued a performance bond on the builder. T.A. Bowman Constructors, the builder of the project, sued the park district. They were first name in the district’s countersuit.

    The park district isn’t waiting for the outcome of the suit to repair the roof. Instead, they are using existing funds to pay for roof repairs.

    Read the full story…


    Consulting Firm Indicted and Charged with Falsifying Concrete Reports

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The New York Times reports that a company paid to inspect concrete at major public works projects in New York has been charged with falsifying results. They had been hired by the city three years ago after their predecessor was found to have falsified results.

    According to the Times, investigators found nothing legitimate in nearly three thousand reports. The owner and five employees of American Standard Testing and Consulting Laboratories have been indicted on twenty-nine counts, including charges under New York’s racketeering law. Prison terms could be up to twenty-five years.

    Prior to the city’s contract with American Standard, the city employed a firm called Testwell. Testwell was found in 2008 to have falsified its test results.

    Read the full story…


    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A parking garage under construction at the Doral campus of Miami Dade College collapsed on October 9. Experts state that the collapse may have been due to errors in the construction process, either in the fabrication of the pre-cast components or in their assembly. The Bradenton Herald quotes Mark Santos, a structural engineer, who “would look at erection procedures ?Äì that’s probably the one question to ask first.”

    During the failure, floors separated from the south wall of the structure. The contractor responsible for the garage, Ajax Building Corp, said there was “no indication of any potential cause.”

    Read the full story…


    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    After a period of growth, the construction industry lost 20,000 jobs in November, based on the federal jobs data. Damon Scott of New Mexico Business Weekly suggests that contractors may have laid off employees in anticipation of the “fiscal cliff.” Ken Simpson, the chief economist of the National Association of Home Builders said in a press release that “it is discouraging that construction employment is still struggling after three years of expansion in the overall economy.”

    Read the full story…