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

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

    Who Is To Blame For Defective — And Still LEED Certified — Courthouse Square?

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

    Changes To Indemnification Statute Are Here! Say Hello To Defense Duties

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    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

    Read Her Lips: “No New Buildings”

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

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

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    Construction Law: Unexpected, Fascinating, Bizarre

    Pictorial Construction Terminology Dictionary — A Quick and Helpful Reference

    Coverage Exists Under Ensuing Loss Provision

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

    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    Injured Construction Worker Settles for Five Hundred Thousand

    Will They Blow It Up?

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

    Ohio subcontractor work exception to the “your work” exclusion

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

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

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

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

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

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Ceiling Collapse Attributed to Construction Defect

    Unit Owners Have No Standing to Sue under Condominium Association’s Policy

    Nevada Supreme Court Reverses Decision against Grader in Drainage Case

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    High School Gym Closed by Construction Defects

    Louisiana Politicians Struggle on Construction Bills, Hospital Redevelopment

    Texas contractual liability exclusion

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

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

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

    Texas Construction Firm Files for Bankruptcy

    Bar to Raise on Green Standard

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    US Courts in Nevada Busy with Yellow Brass

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

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

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    Homeowners Not Compelled to Arbitration in Construction Defect Lawsuit

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

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Hovnanian Increases Construction Defect Reserves for 2012

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    Restitution Unlikely in Las Vegas Construction Defect Scam

    Ohio Casualty’s and Beazer’s Motions were Granted in Part, and Denied in Part

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    History of Defects Leads to Punitive Damages for Bankrupt Developer

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    Construction on the Rise in Washington Town

    San Diego Construction Defect Claim Settled for $2.3 Million

    Water Damage Covered Under Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

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

    Developer’s Fraudulent Statements Are His Responsibility Alone in Construction Defect Case

    Construction Defects: 2010 in Review

    Ninety-Day Extension Denied to KB Home in Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    Mobile Home Owners Not a Class in Drainage Lawsuit

    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    FHA Lists Bridges and Overpasses that May Have Defective Grout

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

    Are Construction Defects Covered by Your General Liability Policy?

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    “Details Matter” is the Foundation in a Texas Construction Defect Suit

    Amerisure Case to be Heard by Texas Supreme Court

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

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

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio
    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 general contracting architectural engineering expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting forensic architectAnaheim California general contracting architect expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting reconstruction expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting defective construction expertAnaheim California general contracting expert witness windowsAnaheim California general contracting fenestration expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting building consultant expertAnaheim California general contracting expert witness structural engineer
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Pier Fire Started by Welders

    August 2, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Welders working on Pier 29 in San Francisco were preparing the building for the America’s Cup sailing race. Instead, they accidentally caused $2.4 million in damages. Mindy Talmadge, a fire department spokesperson, attributed the fire to crews welding a latter to a wall. According to Talmadge, a spark entered a crack in the concrete wall and “the wood on the building underneath was really dry.” It took firefighters more than two hours to extinguish the blaze.

    Read the full story…


    Residential Construction: Shrinking Now, Growing Later?

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Jim Haugey, the Chief Economist for Reed Construction Data noted that new residential construction spending fell 0.2% in June and a slightly larger drop of 0.5% in residential remodeling. While economic growth is still low, Haugey states that homebuilders have “record low inventories.” He forecasts a shrinkage of 1.5% in 2011, followed by about 20% growth in 2012.

    Read the full story…


    Statute of Repose Dependant on When Subcontractors Finished

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Scott C. Sandberg of Snell and Wilmer writes a post on the JDSupra site about the Colorado Court of Appeals decision in Shaw Construction v. United Builder Services. Sanberg notes that when the general contractor was sued by an HOA, the contractor turned around and sued its subcontractors. The contractor made three claims. They claimed that “improvement” referred to the whole project, that “substantial completion” was reached when the architect certified completion, and that the statute of repose was tolled by the HOA’s service of a Construction Defect Action Reform Act notice.

    The subcontractors claimed that “improvement” only referred to their specific work, which reached “substantial completion” when they finished, despite work to be done by other later, and the HOA’s notice to the contractor did not affect the subcontractors. The Colorado court agreed with the subcontractors.

    Sandberg notes that some of the contractor’s were not addressed by the court, noting that “the court did not decide whether an improvement triggering the statute of repose can be determined on a trade-by-trade basis,” and that “the court did not decide whether substantial completion occurs when a certificate of occupancy is issued or when the architect certifies completion.”

    Read the full story…


    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Michigan couple seeks to void their purchase of a condo in Texas after discovering that the complex was undergoing a construction defect lawsuit. ABQ Journal reports that Charles M. Lea and Olga Y. Ziabrikova said that they would not have purchased the condo if they had known the association was already alleging construction defects. The condo association discovered the defects “by at least late 2010,” according to the suit. The couple bought their condo in August 2011 and heard of the defects only in March 2012.

    The couple notes that no one involved with the sale informed them of the construction defect complaints. The community association’s lawsuit states that problems have lead to $2.5 million in damages. The developer, Vegas Verde Condo Partners, have filed a general denial of the construction problems.

    Read the full story…


    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    August 17, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Reporting on the site VegasInc.com, Liz Benton notes that “nobody wants to take the fall for what happened at Harmon.” Work on the Harmon hotel building in Las Vegas’s CityCenter stopped in 2008 after 26 of the planned 49 stories were completed. Lorence Slutzky, a construction law professor at John Marshall Law School and a partner with the Chicago firm Robbins Schwartz Nicholas Lifton & Taylor told Benton that while inspectors and others are complicit, “the real responsibility rests with Perini, which has an obligation to comply with the plan specifications.” Perini’s claim is that they were given faulty design drawings. MGM disputes this.

    Perini has offered to repair the building defects, however MGM has released a statement that they have “zero confidence or trust that Perini can and will properly fix a building it has so badly constructed thus far.” One MGM spokesperson likened these requests from Perini to “the director of ‘Ishar’ demanding a sequel.” “Ishtar,’ cost Columbia Pictures $55 million dollars and earned only $4.2 million in its initial run. Perini claims that MGM halted work because of the economy.

    Read the full story…


    New Construction Laws, New Forms in California

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    New construction laws came into effect in California on July 1. Writing for the Martindale-Hubble Legal Library, Glenn Mau, J. Michael McGuire, and John Tonsing, all of Archer Norris, discuss these changes. They note that the most important part of the changes to California construction law is that “all mechanics liens, stop notices and bond claims recorded after July 1, 2012 must use the new standardized forms and follow the new definitions, notice prerequisites and statutory release form language.”

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Must Defend Claims for Diminution in Value of Damaged Property

    June 19, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insurer’s duty to defend a developer sued by purchasers of homes for damages for diminution in value of homes was at issue in Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Academy Dev., Inc., 2012 WL 1382459 (5th Cir. April 20, 2012).

    In the underlying action, plaintiffs alleged the developer knew when it sold the homes that the lake walls were falling and that water was leaking from the lakes onto adjacent home sites. They sought damages for diminution in the value of their homes resulting from the defective lakes. The action was tried in 2008, and the jury returned a verdict for the developer.

    Mid-Continent initially defended under a reservation of rights.

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

    Read the full story…


    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    October 28, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The MetroWest Daily News reports that a demolition firm was told to leave the construction site at Natick High School since their failure to have workers compensation insurance makes them unable to work on the project. The contractor, Atlantic Dismantling and Site Construction, Inc. may have been working illegally since September.

    The equipment that Atlantic had rented for the job was repossessed in August. Brait Builders Corp, the general contractor for the site had rented equipment so Atlantic could continue their work.

    Their lack of insurance was discovered when a worker had a minor job-related injury. The state had issued a stop-work order for the firm and they could not legally bid on public projects. The school system did not receive any notice of this, and the school’s facilities director said of the general contractor, “chances are Brait never heard of anything either.”

    Read the full story...


    Faulty Workmanship may be an Occurrence in Indiana CGL Policies

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

    The question of whether construction defects can be an occurrence in Commercial General Liabilities (CGL) policies continues to find mixed answers. The United States District Court in Indiana denied the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment in the case of General Casualty Insurance v. Compton Construction Co., Inc. and Mary Ann Zubak stating that faulty workmanship can be an occurrence in CGL policies.

    Judge Theresa L. Springmann cited Sheehan Construction Co., et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al. for her decision, ”The Indiana Supreme Court reversed summary judgment, which had been granted in favor of the insurer in Sheehan, holding that faulty workmanship can constitute an ‘accident’ under a CGL policy, which means any damage would have been caused by an ‘occurrence’ triggering the insurance policy’s coverage provisions. The Indiana Supreme Court also held that, under identically-worded policy exclusion terms that are at issue in this case, defective subcontractor work could provide the basis for a claim under a CGL policy.”

    As we reported on April 1st, South Carolina’s legislature is currently working on bill S-431 that would change the wording of CGL policies in their state to include construction defects. Ray Farmer, Southwest region vice president of the American Insurance Association spoke out against the bill. “CGL policies were never meant to cover faulty workmanship by the contractor,” he said. “The bill’s supplementary and erroneous liability provisions will only serve to unnecessarily impact construction costs in South Carolina.”

    Read the Opinion and order...
    Read the court’s ruling...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...


    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Two New Jersey contractors have pleaded guilty to charges that they made false representations for a government contract in a case related to kickbacks for construction work done in two school districts. New Jersey is recommending that the two men, Martin Starr and Stephen Gallagher, will each pay $50,000 in penalties, serve up to a year in jail, and be unable to accept public contracts for five years.

    Last month, another individual in the case, Kenneth Disko, who had been the engineer for the school district, pleaded guilty on a similar charge. In addition to a $50,000 penalty, he will be serving three to five years in prison. A fourth conspirator, Robert Berman, the former business administrator for one of the school districts, has to pay a $13,000 fine and cooperate with the investigation. He is also barred from public employment in New Jersey and has been terminated from his position.

    Starr admitted to preparing fictitious quotes which appeared to be from other contractors in order that his firm would seem to be the lowest bidder. Gallagher helped in preparing the fictitious bids and also provided cash kickbacks to Disko.

    Read the full story…


    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    September 30, 2011 — Tred Eyerley, Insurance Law Hawaii

    In yet another recent construction defect case, the Illinois Court of Appeal found for coverage. See Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Ct. LEXIS 872 (Ill. Ct. App. Aug. 15, 2011).

    Weather-Tite, Inc. hired Larson as a subcontractor to apply sealant to windows installed by Weather-Tite in a condominium building. The windows subsequently leaked and caused water damage. The homeowner’s association sued Weather-Tite for breach of express and implied warranties. Weather-Tite filed a third-party complaint against Larsen alleging that, if it was liable to the association for breach of warranty, Larsen was liable for contribution as a joint tortfeasor. Weather-Tite and Larsen both tendered defenses to Milwaukee Insurance. The tenders were denied and Milwaukee Insurance filed suit to determine rights under the policy.

    Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed by all parties. The trial court granted Milwaukee Insurance’s summary judgment motion as to Weather-Tite, but granted Larsen’s cross-motion against Milwaukee Insurance.

    On appeal, the appellate court considered whether the underlying pleadings alleged facts demonstrating "property damage" resulting from an "occurrence" within the terms of the policy.

    Read the full story…

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


    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    David Thamann, writing in Property Casualty 360, argues that current actions by legislatures on insurance coverage amount to “legislative interference or overreach.” He notes that under current Colorado law, “a court shall presume that the work of a construction professional that results in property damage — including damage to the work itself or other work — is an accident unless the property damage is intended and expected by the insured.” He argues that here legislators are stepping into the role of the courts. “Insureds and insurers are not always going to be pleased with a court ruling, but that is the system we have.”

    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.


    Former Zurich Executive to Head Willis North America Construction Insurance Group

    March 1, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Insurance Journal reports that Sean McGroarty will be directing surety operations for their construction practice in North America. Previously, Mr. McGroarty was the senior vice president and head of international surety with Zurich Financial Services. He has also worked for Liberty Mutual Group and the St. Paul Companies.

    Mr. McGroarty will be leading a team of professionals offering brokerage services for contract and commercial surety.

    Read the full story…


    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    July 5, 2011 — Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insured homeowners were unsuccessful in arguing around the policy's exclusions when seeking coverage for damage caused by Chinese drywall. Ross v. C. Adams. Constr. & Design, L.L.C., 2011 La. App. LEXIS 769 (La. Ct. App. June 14, 2011).

    Before the insureds purchased and moved into their home, it was renovated. After moving in, the insures discovered foreign gypsum drywall, or Chinese drywall. The insureds submitted a claim to Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Company. In an investigation, the insurer confirmed the presence of Chinese drywall and damage to the metal surfaces caused by corrosion. Louisiana Citizens refused coverage and the insureds sued. The trial court denied the insured's motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment to Louisiana Citizens.

    The court of appeal affirmed. Initially, the court determined the insureds sustained a direct physical loss. The inherent qualities of the Chinese drywall created a physical loss to the home and required that the drywall be removed and replaced.

    Four exclusions, however, barred coverage. First, damages due to faulty or defective materials were excluded from coverage. The Chinese drywall emitted high levels of sulfuric gas which caused the damage to the insured's plumbing, electrical wiring and metal components.

    Read the full story…

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


    Insurer Must Cover Construction Defects Claims under Actual Injury Rule

    March 1, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The Texas Court of Appeals held that the insured need not prove the exact dates physical damage occurred in order to trigger defense and indemnity coverage. Vines-Herrin Custom Homes, LLC v. Great Am. Lloyds Ins. Co., 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 10027 (Tex. Ct. App. Dec. 21, 2011).

    In 1999, the insured built a home. He was insured under a CGL policy issued by Great American from November 9, 1998 to November 9, 2000. Thereafter, the insured held a CGL policy issued by Mid-Continent from November 9, 2000 to September 18, 2002.

    After construction was completed, the insured sold the house to the buyer in May 2000. After moving in, the buyer found numerous construction defects in the home, including water entering cracks in the home, and sinking and sagging of parts of the house. The buyer sued the insured, who sought coverage under the two policies. When the insurers refused to defend the underlying suit, the insured sued for a declaratory judgment.

    The underlying case went to arbitration and an award of $2.4 million was granted to the buyer. The insured assigned to the buyer his claims against the insurers.

    Read the full story…

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


    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    April 14, 2011 — April 14, 2011 Beverley BevenFlorez - Construction Defect Journal

    The Florida Property Bill (HBB 803) was passed by the Economic Affairs Committee by a vote of 11-7, according to Property Casualty 360, after adopting nine new amendments. The additions to the bill included limiting notice of claims to a set number of years, extending the statute of limitation on property claims from five years to six years, among others.

    HB 803 and SB 408, the Senate companion bill, focus primarily on residential property insurance. They make changes to the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund, while also promoting increased notification of policy changes to policyholders. Sections of the bills provide minor fixes such as renaming Citizens Property Insurance Corporation to Taxpayer-Funded Property Insurance Corporation. However, other sections of the bills contain more significant policy changes such as sinkhole coverage and hurricane claims.

    The bills’ intent, according to the SunSentinel.com, is to reduce fraudulent claims and to bring new insurers into the insurance market. However, SunSentinel.com also reports that the bills may drastically increase property insurance premiums.

    Read the full Property Casualty 360 article...

    Read the full Sun Sentinel article...


    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    June 15, 2011 — Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP

    On June 1, 2011 by majority vote, the California Senate passed Senate Bill 474, which would amend Civil Code section 2782, and add Civil Code section 2782.05. The passage of this new law is a critical development for real estate developers, general contractors and subcontractors because it will affect how these projects are insured and how disputes are resolved.

    Civil Code section 2782 was amended in 2007 to prohibit Type I indemnity agreements for residential projects only. Since 2007, various trade associations and labor unions have lobbied to expand those very same restrictions to other projects. These new provisions apply to contracts, entered into after January 1, 2013, that are not for residential projects, and that are not executed by a public entity. The revisions provide that any provision in a contract purporting to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend another for their negligence or other fault is against public policy and void. These provisions cannot be waived.

    A provision in a contract requiring additional insured coverage is also void and unenforceable to the extent it would be prohibited under the new law. Moreover, the new law does not apply to wrap-up insurance policies or programs, or a cause of action for breach of contract or warranty that exists independently of the indemnity obligation.

    The practical impact of this new law is that greater participation in wrap-up insurance programs will likely result. While many wrap-up programs suffer from problems such as insufficient limits, and disputes about funding the self-insured retention, the incentive for the developer or general contractor to utilize wrap-up insurance will be greater than ever before because they will no longer be able to spread the risk of the litigation to the trades and the trade carriers.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.