• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Ashburn Virginia tract home building expert Ashburn Virginia housing building expert Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking building expert Ashburn Virginia condominium building expert Ashburn Virginia multi family housing building expert Ashburn Virginia Medical building building expert Ashburn Virginia hospital construction building expert Ashburn Virginia townhome construction building expert Ashburn Virginia casino resort building expert Ashburn Virginia condominiums building expert Ashburn Virginia office building building expert Ashburn Virginia custom homes building expert Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction building expert Ashburn Virginia institutional building building expert Ashburn Virginia custom home building expert Ashburn Virginia industrial building building expert Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction building expert Ashburn Virginia low-income housing building expert Ashburn Virginia retail construction building expert Ashburn Virginia production housing building expert Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction building expert Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia engineering consultantAshburn Virginia architectural engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction safety expertAshburn Virginia consulting general contractorAshburn Virginia construction expert testimonyAshburn Virginia architectural expert witnessAshburn Virginia concrete expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".

    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ashburn Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northern Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4840
    3901 Centerview Dr Suite E
    Chantilly, VA 20151

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    The Top of Virginia Builders Association
    Local # 4883
    1182 Martinsburg Pike
    Winchester, VA 22603

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Shenandoah Valley Builders Association
    Local # 4848
    PO Box 1286
    Harrisonburg, VA 22803

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Piedmont Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4890
    PO Box 897
    Culpeper, VA 22701

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Fredericksburg Area Builders Association
    Local # 4830
    3006 Lafayette Blvd
    Fredericksburg, VA 22408

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Augusta Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 4804
    PO Box 36
    Waynesboro, VA 22980

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
    Local # 4809
    PO Box 7743
    Charlottesville, VA 22906

    Ashburn Virginia Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Ashburn Virginia

    Viewpoint: A New Approach to Job Site Safety Reaps Benefits

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    Quick Note: Insurer’s Denial of Coverage Waives Right to Enforce Post-Loss Policy Conditions

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Denial of Claim for Concealment or Fraud Reversed by Sixth Circuit

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded "Because Of" Property Damage Are Covered by Policy

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Construction Defect Lawsuit May Affect Home Financing

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    In Florida, Component Parts of an Improvement to Real Property are Subject to the Statute of Repose for Products Liability Claims

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Firm Seeks to Squash Subpoena in Coverage CD Case

    Reroof Blamed for $10 Million in Damage

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    But Wait There’s More: Preserving Claims on Commonwealth Projects

    Specific Performance of an Option Contract to Purchase Real Property is Barred Absent Agreement on All Material Terms

    Two Injured in Walkway Collapse of Detroit Apartment Complex

    Falls Requiring Time Off from Work are Increasing

    Two-Part Series on Condominium Construction Defect Issues

    Town Concerned Over Sinkhole at Condo Complex

    Acceptable Worksite: New City of Seattle Specification Provisions Now In Effect

    Aging-in-Place Features Becoming Essential for Many Home Buyers

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Got Licensing Questions? CSLB Licensing Workshop November 17th and December 15th

    What You Need to Know About Enforcement Actions by the Contractors State License Board

    Housing Advocacy Group Moved to Dissolve New Jersey's Council on Affordable Housing

    South Carolina Supreme Court Finds that Consequential Damage Arise From "Occurrence"

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Factories Boost U.S. Output as Builders Gain Confidence: Economy

    After 60 Years, I-95 Is Complete

    Heathrow Tempts Runway Opponents With $1,200 Christmas Sweetener

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Environmental Suit Against Lockheed Martin Dismissed

    Two Texas Cities Top San Francisco for Property Investors

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Agrihoods: The Best of Both Worlds

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    Home Sales and Stock Price Up for D. R. Horton

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Denies Bad Faith Claim in HO Policy Dispute

    The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    Union Handbilling: When, Where, and Why it is Legal

    Supreme Court of New Jersey Reviews Statutes of Limitation and the Discovery Rule in Construction Defect Cases
    Corporate Profile


    The Ashburn, Virginia Building Expert 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.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Concurrent Causation Doctrine Applies Where Natural and Man-made Perils Combine to Create Loss

    January 19, 2017 —
    The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between the District Courts in applying the Concurrent Causation Doctrine where there were multiple causes creating the loss. Sebo v. Am. Home Assur. Co., 2016 Fla. LEXIS 2596 (Fla. Dec. 1, 2016). After purchasing his home, John Sebo procured an "all risks" homeowners policy provided by American Home Assurance Company (AHAC). Shortly after Sebo purchased the property, water began to intrude the home during rainstorms. Major water leaks occurred. It became clear that the home suffered from major design and construction defects. In October 2005, Hurricane Wilma further damaged the home. AHAC denied coverage for most of the claimed losses. It provided $50,000 for mold. The residence could not be repaired and was eventually demolished. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years

    February 05, 2015 —
    Sometime next week, a metal frame will go up around the blocky brick tower at Manhattan’s 425 Park Ave., designed to protect pedestrians from falling objects. It’s a prelude to the building’s demise. In about three years, if all goes according to plan, the site will have a new Norman Foster-designed skyscraper more than twice the height of the existing one. The replacement would be the first new office building in almost four decades on what the developer, David Levinson, called New York’s “grand boulevard of commerce.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Levitt, Bloomberg

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    February 10, 2012 —

    In Alliance Mutual Insurance Co. v. Dove, 714 S.E.2d 782 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011), claimant Murphy-Brown hired insured Dove to repair a broken elevator belt in a grain elevator in Murphy-Brown’s feed mill. The elevator was inside a metal duct and, to access the broken belt, Dove had to cut out a section of the duct. After replacing the belt, Dove welded the metal section back to the duct. Immediately after Dove completed the welding, dust inside the duct ignited, causing an explosion in the elevator, resulting in property damage to the elevator and other property. Murphy-Brown sued Dove for negligence seeking damages for the repair and replacement of the elevator, repair and replacement of the other property, increased grain handling costs during the repairs, and loss of use.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Policy's Operation Classification Found Ambiguous

    May 21, 2014 —
    Property damage caused by a subcontractor's sheet piling was found to be within the policy's operation classification, which included "grading of land." Canal Indemn. Co. v. Margaretville of NSM, Inc., No. 13-13541 (11th Cir. April 15, 2014). Canal issued a CGL policy to the insured. The policy had a classification limitation provision: “This insurance applies to bodily injury, property damage, personal injury, advertising injury or medical expense arising out of only those operations that are classified and shown on the Commercial General Liability Coverage Declarations . . .” The policy's Declarations, in turn, referred to the operation classification as "Grading of Land - INCL. Borrowing, Filling or Back Filling." The policy did not define these terms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Buyer Alleges Condo Full of Mold and Mice

    March 26, 2014 —
    Sarah Schottenstein purchased a New York condo for $1.65 million, and claimed that “she wound up getting a moldy, mouse-infested mess,” according to DNAinfo New York. Schottenstein alleged that “within a month of moving in she found her apartment was infested with mice, had toxic mold growing beneath her floors, brown water coming from the tap and leaks from the ceiling, according to court documents.” According to DNAinfo New York, “Microecologies Inc., an environmental health firm, found 'very heavy levels' of the infectious mold Aspergillus Chaetomium under the floor of Schottenstein's apartment.” However, Larry Pittinsky, an attorney for the condo board, told DNAinfo New York that “the case was "about a woman trying to escape her obligation to pay money.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Supreme Court of Idaho Rules That Substantial Compliance With the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act Suffices to Bring Suit

    July 31, 2018 —
    In Davison v. Debest Plumbing, Inc., 416 P.3d 943 (Ida. 2018), the Supreme Court of Idaho addressed the issue of whether plaintiffs who provided actual notice of a defective condition, but not written notice as stated in the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act (NORA), Idaho Code §§ 6-2501 to 6-2504, et. seq., substantially complied with the act and if the plaintiffs’ notice was sufficient to bring suit. Section 6-2503 of the NORA states that, “[p]rior to commencing an action against a construction professional for a construction defect, the claimant shall serve written notice of claim on the construction professional. The notice of claim shall state that the claimant asserts a construction defect claim against the construction professional and shall describe the claim in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the general nature of the defect.” Any action not complying with this requirement should be dismissed without prejudice. The court held that the defendant’s actual notice of the defect was sufficient to satisfy the objectives of the NORA and, thus, the plaintiffs’ action complied with the NORA. In Davison, Scott and Anne Davison hired general contractor Gould Custom Builders (Gould) to remodel a vacation home in McCall, Idaho. Gould subcontracted out the plumbing work to Debest Plumbing (Debest). This work included installing a bathtub. When the Davisons arrived at their home for the first time on July 25, 2013, they noticed a leak from the subject bathtub. The Davisons contacted Gould and, the next morning, Gil Gould arrived with a Debest employee to inspect the home. In addition to inspecting the home, the Debest employee repaired the leak and helped Gould remove some water-damaged material. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    August 27, 2013 —
    A third-party audit of the construction at the Port of Anchorage has found fault with the design provided by the engineers. In response, PND, the engineering firm involved, has claimed that it was not their design, but faulty construction of it that lead to an interruption in the construction project. Separately, the Office of the Inspector General has called into question how MARAD, the agency which oversaw the port construction, handled the planning and contracts for the project. Control of the project has been taken over by the Municipality of Anchorage, and they have called into question PND’s open cell sheet pile design and PND’s design of the dock infrastructure. Simpson, Gumpertz and Heger reviewed the design, comparing it to a design provided by CH2M Hill, and found that the PND design was inadequate. A contract was subsequently awarded to CH2M Hill. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Client Alert: Naming of Known and Unknown Defendants in Initial Complaints: A Cautionary Tale

    September 24, 2014 —
    On September 12, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Butler v. National Community Renaissance of California, upheld a district court's dismissal of certain defendants named in amended complaints, affirming the necessity of naming those known and unknown defendants in Plaintiff's original complaint. In April 2009, Plaintiff Zina Butler filed an action in federal district court, naming a single defendant, National Community Renaissance Corporation ("National"), for an alleged warrantless search of Plaintiff's apartment on April 18, 2007. The single page complaint asserted that the apartment manager provided a Section 8 investigator, a City employee and Sherriff deputies keys to Plaintiff's apartment and conducted a search in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. Shortly after, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint, with the only change being the addition of defendant, the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles ("HACoLA") in the caption. In May 2009, the court (on its own accord) dismissed the first amended complaint with leave to amend as "it [was] unclear whom Plaintiff intend[ed] to sue." In June 2009, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, identifying National and HACoLA in the caption as defendants, but separately identifying several other individuals and entities allegedly involved in the incident occurring in April of 2007 in the complaint's statement of facts. The Court, once again, dismissed the second amended complaint with leave to amend for the same reasons it dismissed Plaintiff's first amended complaint. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefco, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at; Ms. Stefko may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of