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

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Nevada Budget Remains at Impasse over Construction Defect Law

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

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

    Construction Jobs Expected to Rise in Post-Hurricane Rebuilding

    Lawsuit over Construction Defects Not a Federal Case

    Nebraska Man Sentenced for Insurance Fraud in Construction Projects

    Water District Denied New Trial in Construction Defect Claim

    Georgia Supreme Court Rules Construction Defects Can Constitute an Occurrence in CGL Policies

    Housing Market on Way to Recovery

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

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    Mandatory Arbitration Provision Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Homeowners Must Comply with Arbitration over Construction Defects

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

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

    No Coverage Under Ensuing Loss Provision

    More Charges in Las Vegas HOA Construction Defect Scam

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    Defective Drains Covered Despite Water Intrusion Exclusion

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

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

    Denver Court Rules that Condo Owners Must Follow Arbitration Agreement

    Know the Minnesota Statute of Limitations for Construction Defect Claims

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    The Ever-Growing Thicket Of California Civil Code Section 2782

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

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

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Product Exclusion: The Big Reason Behind The Delay of LEED 2012

    Can Negligent Contractors Shift Blame in South Carolina?

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    New OSHA Fall Rules to Start Early in Minnesota

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

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

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

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    Surveyors Statute Trumps Construction Defect Claim in Tennessee

    OSHA Extends Temporary Fall Protection Rules

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions

    Florida Property Bill Passes Economic Affairs Committee with Amendments

    Park District Sues over Leaky Roof

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

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

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

    South Carolina Contractors Regain General Liability Coverage

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

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

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    Defective Shingle Claims Valid Despite Bankruptcy

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Residential Construction Down in San Diego

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

    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    Fire Reveals Defects, Appeals Court Affirms Judgment against Builder

    Going Green for Lower Permit Fees

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

    Florida trigger

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    Celebrities Lose Case in Construction Defect Arbitration

    Construction Upturn in Silicon Valley

    Builder to Appeal Razing of Harmon Tower

    Exact Dates Not Needed for Construction Defect Insurance Claim

    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

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

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

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

    In Re Golba: The Knaubs v. Golba and Rollison, Debtors

    Pipes May Be Defective, But Owners Lack Standing

    School District Marks End of Construction Project by Hiring Lawyers

    Construction Firm Charged for Creating “Hail” Damage

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

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

    Partial Settlement in DeKalb Construction Management Case

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit

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

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Stayed by SB800

    US Courts in Nevada Busy with Yellow Brass

    Colorado Court of Appeals Rejects Retroactive Application of C.R.S. § 13-20-808.
    Corporate Profile

    ANAHEIM CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION EXPERT WITNESS
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Anaheim, California Construction Expert Witness Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Anaheim California general contracting hospital construction expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting reconstruction expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting building code compliance expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting construction expert witnessesAnaheim California general contracting delay claim expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting testifying construction expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting window expert witnessAnaheim California general contracting construction expertsAnaheim California general contracting OSHA expert witness construction
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    New Web Site Tracks Settled Construction Defect Claims

    June 19, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Peter Lissner, a former Nevada homebuilder, has created a new site to help track homes that have been involved in construction defect litigation. His site, housefaxreview.com, collections documentation about homes where claims of construction defects have been made. He told The Builders Magazine concerns about “the number of homes that have been served notices, received compensation, yet the homes weren’t repaired.” On the site, the creator is identified as “a family owned builder.” According to the site, “the builder had no claims until the neighborhood reached the statutory claims limit 10 years.”

    Lissner also claims that in many cases, after settling construction defect lawsuits, the homeowners sell to subsequent buyers without disclosing the lawsuit or their failure to repair. “Who is going to let the new homeowner know about the issue?” he asks.

    Documents on the site are priced according to their relevance. Lissner notes that those who provide documents to the site will receive free access.

    Read the full story…


    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    March 7, 2011 — By Steve Cvitanovic of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP.

    Contractors should always be sure that they understand the licensing in any Subcontract or Prime Contract before entering into any agreement. However, on March 3, 2011, in the case of Pacific Casson & Shoring, Inc. v. Bernards Bros., Inc. 2011 Cal.App.Lexis 236, the Court of Appeal determined that if a specialty license is subsumed within another license, the specialty license may not be required.

    Bernards entered into a subcontract with Pacific to excavate, backfill, grade and provide geotechnical design parameters for a hospital. The Prime Contract required the bidder to maintain a Class C-12 specialty earthwork license. However, Pacific only held a Class A general engineering license which it turns out was suspended during the performance of the work. Pacific sued Bernards for nonpayment of $544,567, but the lawsuit was dismissed because the trial court found that Pacific (1) lacked a C-12 license, and (2) Pacific’s Class A license was suspended for failure to pay an unrelated judgment. Pacific was also ordered to disgorge $206,437 in prior payments.

    The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded. The Court of Appeal agreed with Pacific and held that a C-12 specialty license was not required despite the Prime Contract. The Court of Appeal found that the C-12 specialty license would have been “superfluous” since it was fully encompassed within the Class A requirements. However, the Court of Appeal also remanded the case for further

    Read the full story...

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


    Builder Waits too Long to Dispute Contract in Construction Defect Claim

    May 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The Louisiana Court of Appeals has affirmed the lower court’s judgment in the case of Richard v. Alleman. The Richards initiated this lawsuit under Louisiana’s New Home Warranty Act, claiming that they had entered into a construction contract with Mr. Alleman and that they quickly found that his materials and methods had been substandard. They sued for the cost of repairing the home and filing the lawsuit. Mr. Alleman countersued, claiming the Richards failed to pay for labor, materials, and services. By his claim, they owed him $12,838.80.

    The trial court split the issues of liability and damages. In the first trial, the court concluded that there was a contact between Alleman and the Richards and that the New Home Warranty Act applied. Mr. Alleman did not appeal this trial.

    The second trial was on the issue of damages. Under the New Home Warranty Act, the Richards were found to be entitled to $36,977.11 in damages. In a second judgment, the couple was awarded $18,355.59 in attorney’s fees. Mr. Alleman appealed both judgments.

    In his appeal, Alleman contended that the trial court erred in determining that the Home Warranty Act applied. This was, however, not the subject of the trial, having been determined at the earlier trial. Nor did the court accept Alleman’s claim that the Richards failed to comply with the Act. The trial record made clear that the Richards provided Alleman with a list of problems with their home by certified mail.

    The court did not establish whether the Richards told Alleman to never return to their home, or if Alleman said he would never return to the home, but one thing was clear: Alleman did not complete the repairs in the list.

    A further repair was added after the original list. The Richards claimed that with a loud noise, a large crack appeared in their tile flooring. Mr. Alleman stated that he was not liable for this as he was not given a chance to repair the damage, the Richards hired the flooring subcontractors, and that the trial court rejected the claim that the slab was defective. The appeals court found no problem with the award. Alleman had already “refused to make any of the repairs.”

    Finally Alleman made a claim on a retainage held by the Richards. Since Alleman did not bring forth proof at trial, the appeals court upheld the trial courts refusal to award a credit to Alleman.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    August 11, 2011 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The homeowners sued their contractor, alleging the contractor had defectively constructed and failed to complete their home.  State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Vogelgesang, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72618 (D. Haw. July 6, 2011).  The homeowners' complaint pled, among other things, damage caused by breach of contract and negligence.  State Farm agreed to defend under a reservation of rights.

    State Farm filed suit in federal court for declaratory relief.  Judge Mollway granted State Farm's motion for summary judgment.  Relying on the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeal's decision in Group Builders, Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 123 Haw. 142, 231 P.3d 67 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010), Judge Mollway determined that the claims asserted in the underlying litigation arose from the contractor's alleged breach of contract.  Group Builders held that breach of contract claims based on allegations of shoddy performance were not covered under CGL policies.

    Read the full story…

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


    Homebuilding Still on the Rise

    December 20, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    The National Association of Home Builders reports that spending on private homes was up three percent in October 2012, bringing it to a four-year high. This was part of a trend in which fourteen of the last fifteen months have seen increases in spending on residential construction. Likewise, multifamily residences have seen thirteen months of increased spending, putting it 82% higher than its low, two years ago. ¬?In addition to new homes, remodeling is also up, reaching its highest point in five years.

    Read the full story…


    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    November 7, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    No one needs to tell Toll Brothers about the impact of Hurricane Sandy. The Wall Street Journal reports that the home building company lost power as a result of the storm. Martin Connor, the company’s CFO, told the Journal that he did not expect the hurricane to have a big effect on sales. Luckily for the company, many of its large projects are either sufficiently completed to provide shelter or too early in the process to be affected by the storm. “This type of weather event has limited impact on the market. It may move settlements later, and may defer people a weekend or two until they go out shopping. But it doesn’t have a long impact.”

    Read the full story…


    Architect Not Responsible for Injuries to Guests

    September 1, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Texas Court of Appeals has ruled, with one dissent, that the architectural firm that designed a home was not responsible to the injuries caused to guests when a balcony collapsed. Judge David Puryear wrote the majority opinion in Black + Vernooy Architects v. Smith.

    Black + Vernooy designed a vacation home for Robert and Kathy Maxfield in 2000. The Maxfields hired a general contractor to build the home. The general contractor hired a subcontractor to build a balcony; however, the subcontractor did not follow the architect’s design in building the balcony.

    A year after the house was completed; the Maxfields were visited by Lou Ann Smith and Karen Gravely. The balcony collapsed under the two women. Ms. Gravely suffered a broken finger, a crushed toe, and bruises. Ms. Smith was rendered a paraplegic as a result of the fall. They sued the Maxfields, the general contractor, and the architects for negligence. The Maxfields and the general contractor settled. A jury found that the architects held 10% of the responsibility. The architects appealed the judgment of the district court.

    The Appeals Court reversed this judgment, noting that “there has been no allegation that the Architects negligently designed the balcony or that the Architects actually created the defects at issue.” Further, “the Smiths allege that the defect was caused by the construction practices of the contractor and subcontractor when the balcony was not built in accordance with the design plans of the Architects.”

    The court found that even though the architects had a duty “to endeavor to guard against defects and deficiencies in the construction of the home and to generally ascertain whether the home was being built in compliance with the construction plans,” this duty did not extend to third parties.

    Read the court’s decision…


    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…


    Destruction of Construction Defect Evidence Leads to Sanctions against Plaintiff

    July 10, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    Stating that the plaintiff’s actions have left the defendants in a situation where they “cannot properly defend the action,” a judge in the US District Court of New York has sanctioned the plaintiffs in Aktas v. JMC Dev. Co.

    The plaintiffs hired JMC Development and Stephen Jung, an architect, to renovate their vacation home in Adirnodack, New York. As work progressed, “due to disagreements regarding the completion date and payments for the project, the relationship began to deteriorate.” The plaintiffs hired George Villar as an owner’s representative who “testified that he deemed the workmanship to be ‘poor.’”

    Subsequently, the locks where changed on the home, preventing JMC from performing any additional work, after which drywall was removed, which Villar stated was so that “the engineer come and look at the framing.” Subsequently, Villar sent a letter to JMC stating that the work was “performed in an inadequate, negligent and un-professional manner.” Villar informed JMC that they were not to visit the property. Subsequently, the plaintiffs hired another firm. “Plaintiffs testified that the materials were ‘carted away’ and ‘thrown out.’”

    The plaintiffs filed a suit against JMC and others. JMC filed a motion requesting that the plaintiffs be sanctioned for their spoliation of evidence. The court noted that “the plaintiffs recognized that litigation was imminent,” and that they “had a duty to preserve the evidence. As all of JMC’s work was destroyed, there is no evidence of whether or not the work was defective. The court concluded that it will “issue an adverse inference charge that permits the jury to infer that the missing evidence was favorable to the defendants.”

    In conclusion, the court granted in part the spoliation sanctions. They granted JMC a summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims of fraud.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    June 7, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Las Vegas Sun reports that Assembly Bill 401, the construction defect bill, lost in a vote of 9 to 12. The measure extended the time for construction defect suits to be filed, awarded legal costs only to successful plaintiffs, and set a definition of construction defects. Two Democrats joined the Republicans in the Senate in defeating the bill.

    Read the full story…


    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

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

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

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

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

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


    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    September 1, 2011 — CJD Staff

    Citing public safety concerns and the cost of repair, MGM Resorts International is seeking to demolish the unfinished hotel tower. The company has a few hurdles to go through before they start laying the charges to implode the structure. Any plans would have to be approved by not only Clark County officials, but also the district court has an order blocking any activity during litigation between MGM and the general contractor on the project, Perini Building Company.

    Architectural Record reports that MGM states it would take “approximately 18 months to conduct test and come up with an approved, permitted design to fix the Harmon.” MGM feels that repairs would then take another two to three years. Perini contends that they could “provide stamped drawings detailing all necessary repairs within three months.” They attribute MGM’s desire to demolish the building as “buyer’s remorse.”

    Read the full story…


    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    July 19, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    Lockton Companies, LLC, the largest privately held independent insurance broker, has announced that it is expanding its construction and design team with the hiring of Karen Erger and Tom Miller.

    Ms. Erger will provide professional liability practice management, loss prevention, contract and complex claims management consulting services to Lockton's architectural, engineering and construction clients in her role as Vice President, Director of Practice Management. Her background includes construction litigation at a leading construction law firm, professional liability claims defense and claims consulting for major professional liability underwriters.

    Miller joins Lockton as a Senior Vice President within the Design and Construction Unit. His role will be dedicated to serving the needs of engineering, architecture and construction firms performing services around the globe. He has spent more than 15 years concentrating on professional liability for design professionals and contractors in multiple roles. He previously managed the professional liability underwriting of one of the largest construction insurers and has developed numerous manuscript insurance products as well as focused on strategic planning to enhance business unit opportunities.

    Read the full story…


    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...


    Florida Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Homeowners Unaware of Construction Defects and Lack of Permits

    December 9, 2011 — CDJ Staff

    The Florida Court of Appeals has ruled that a homeowner is not liable for defects in unpermitted alterations, reversing a lower court’s decision in Jensen v. Bailey. The Jensens sold their house to the Baileys. During the sale, the Jensens filled out a property disclosure statement, checking “no” to a question about “any improvement or additions to the property, whether by your or by others that have been constructed in violation of building codes or without necessary permits.”

    After moving in, the Baileys discovered several problems with the home. One involved a defective sewer connection leading to repeated backups. The Baileys also found problems with remodeling the Jensens had done in the kitchen, master bath, and bedroom. The remodeling work was not done with required permits nor was it up to code.

    The court noted that an earlier case, Johnson v. Davis, established four criteria: “the seller of a home must have knowledge of a defect in the property; the defect must materially affect the value of the property; the defect must not be readily observable and must be unknown to the buyer; and the buyer must establish that the seller failed to disclose the defect to the buyer.” The court found that the first of these criteria was crucial to determining the case.

    In the Johnson ruling, the then Chief Justice dissented, fearing that the courts “would ultimately construe Johnson’s requirement of actual knowledge to permit a finding of liability based on constructive knowledge,” quoting Justice Boyd, “a rule of constructive knowledge will develop based on the reasoning that if the seller did not know of the defect, he should have known about it before attempting to sell the property.” The Appeals Court concluded that the lower court hit this point in ruling on Jensen v. Bailey.

    Citing other Florida cases, the court noted that the Johnson rule does require “proof of the seller’s actual knowledge of the defect.” The court cited a case in which it was concluded that the seller “should have known” that there was circumstantial evidence was that the seller did know about the defects, as the seller had been involved in the construction of the home.

    In the case of the Jensens, the lower court concluded that they did not know that the work was defective, nor did they know that they were obligated to obtain permits for it. The Appeals Court found this one fact sufficient to reverse the decision and remand the case to the lower court for a final judgment in favor of the Jensens.

    Read the court’s decision…


    Judge Concludes Drywall Manufacturer Sold in Florida

    September 13, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    A Florida judge has concluded that the Chinese drywall manufacturer Taishan actively sought to sell its products in Florida and cannot now claim that it was not involved. Judge Joseph Farnia also noted that the main distributor of the drywall was, as noted in the Miami Herald, an arm of the company. Lennar Hones has sued the firm after installing drywall manufactured by the company in hundreds of homes.

    Taishan’s activities in Florida included not only distributing samples, but also hosting tours of their plants in China for construction executives, and even making customized runs. According to other reports, has lost past cases over defects in their drywall.

    Read the full story…


    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    February 10, 2012 — Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii

    The insurer unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, contending it had no obligation to defend two related underlying construction defect cases. Amerisure Ins. Co. v. R.L.Lantana Boatyard, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2466 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2012).

    An engineering report noted design construction defects and deficiencies in visible, physical improvements at The Moorings at Lantana Condominium. In two lawsuits, The Moorings sued the developer, R.L. Lantana Boatyard ("RLLB"), and the contractor, Current Builders of Florida.

    Current Builders was insured by Amerisure. RLLB was named as an additional insured under the Amerisure policy.

    Read the full story…

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


    Water Is the Enemy

    August 16, 2012 — CDJ Staff

    So says Melissa Mitchell, writing in the blog of Community Association Consultants. She cites the nightmare scenario of “an unseen presence lurking behind the walls.” Not a horror movie, but water intrusion, which she notes can cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage. Eric Hoff, of Western Architectural, is quoted that “it only takes a hole one-eighth inch diameter in a building’s exterior to allow the intrusion of 35 gallons of water over twelve months.” Destructive testing on a building in in the Pacific Northwest revealed that water intrusion had lead to structural failure of the building. The wet wood had made a home for carpenter ants. Repairs exceeded $100,000.

    Mitchell notes that “deferred maintenance can be costly” and cites the importance of preventative maintenance or the development of a maintenance plan. She concludes that “if you own or are responsible for maintaining a condominium complex, apartment building or commercial structure, it’s simply good business sense to have a building envelope assessment conducted by experts in the field.”

    Read the full story…