• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Blountstown Florida concrete tilt-up building expert Blountstown Florida high-rise construction building expert Blountstown Florida casino resort building expert Blountstown Florida institutional building building expert Blountstown Florida structural steel construction building expert Blountstown Florida townhome construction building expert Blountstown Florida condominiums building expert Blountstown Florida low-income housing building expert Blountstown Florida Medical building building expert Blountstown Florida parking structure building expert Blountstown Florida custom home building expert Blountstown Florida custom homes building expert Blountstown Florida landscaping construction building expert Blountstown Florida retail construction building expert Blountstown Florida Subterranean parking building expert Blountstown Florida hospital construction building expert Blountstown Florida housing building expert Blountstown Florida industrial building building expert Blountstown Florida office building building expert Blountstown Florida production housing building expert Blountstown Florida mid-rise construction building expert Blountstown Florida
    Blountstown Florida construction expert testimonyBlountstown Florida forensic architectBlountstown Florida civil engineering expert witnessBlountstown Florida stucco expert witnessBlountstown Florida slope failure expert witnessBlountstown Florida building code compliance expert witnessBlountstown Florida engineering expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Blountstown, Florida

    Florida Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: In Title XXXIII Chapter 558, the Florida Legislature establishes a requirement that homeowners who allege construction defects must first notify the construction professional responsible for the defect and allow them an opportunity to repair the defect before the homeowner canbring suit against the construction professional. The statute, which allows homeowners and associations to file claims against certain types of contractors and others, defines the type of defects that fall under the authority of the legislation and the types of housing covered in thelegislation. Florida sets strict procedures that homeowners must follow in notifying construction professionals of alleged defects. The law also establishes strict timeframes for builders to respond to homeowner claims. Once a builder has inspected the unit, the law allows the builder to offer to repair or settle by paying the owner a sum to cover the cost of repairing the defect. The homeowner has the option of accepting the offer or rejecting the offer and filing suit. Under the statute the courts must abate any homeowner legal action until the homeowner has undertaken the claims process. The law also requires contractors, subcontractors and other covered under the law to notify homeowners of the right to cure process.

    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Blountstown Florida

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.

    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Columbia County Builders Association
    Local # 1007
    PO Box 7353
    Lake City, FL 32055

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Florida Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 1000
    PO Box 1259
    Tallahassee, FL 32302

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of West Florida
    Local # 1048
    4400 Bayou Blvd Suite 45
    Pensacola, FL 32503

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Okaloosa-Walton Cos
    Local # 1056
    1980 Lewis Turner Blvd
    Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Tallahassee Builders Association Inc
    Local # 1064
    1835 Fiddler Court
    Tallahassee, FL 32308

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Northeast Florida Builders Association
    Local # 1024
    103 Century 21 Dr Ste 100
    Jacksonville, FL 32216

    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Panama City (Fla)
    Local # 1042
    PO Box 979
    Panama City, FL 32402
    Blountstown Florida Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Expert News and Information
    For Blountstown Florida

    Tiny Houses Big With U.S. Owners Seeking Economic Freedom

    Taking Care of Infrastructure – Interview with Marilyn Grabowski

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    No Retrofit without Repurposing in Los Angeles

    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates

    Georgia Passes Solar CUVA Bill

    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    Weyerhaeuser Leaving Home Building Business

    Indemnity Clauses That Conflict with Oregon Indemnity Statute Can Remain Partially Valid and Enforceable

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    Drop in Civil Trials May Cause Problems for Construction Defect Cases

    Executing Documents with Powers of Attorney and Confessions of Judgment in PA Just Got Easier

    Augmented and Mixed Reality in Construction

    Dealing with Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    Steel-Fiber Concrete Link Beams Perform Well in Tests

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Awarded Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar

    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    Architects Group Lowers U.S. Construction Forecast

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    What is a Civil Dispute?

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    New Index Tracking Mortgages for New Homes

    Builders Beware: A New Class Of Defendants In Asbestos Lawsuits

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Fourth Circuit Issues New Ruling on Point Sources Under the CWA

    California to Build ‘Total Disaster City’ for Training

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    Rent Increases During the Coronavirus Emergency Part II: Avoiding Violations Under California’s Anti-Price Gouging Statute

    Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds Defendant Has the Burden of Offering Alternative Measure of Damages to Prove that Plaintiff’s Measure of Damages is Unreasonable

    Toll Brothers Faces Construction Defect Lawsuit in New Jersey

    Reminder About the Upcoming Mechanic’s Lien Form Change

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    Gut Feeling Does Not Disqualify Expert Opinion

    Sobering Facts for Construction Safety Day

    Quick Note: Lis Pendens Bond When Lis Pendens Not Founded On Recorded Instrument Or Statute

    HOA Coalition Statement on Construction-Defects Transparency Legislation

    Contracts and Fraud Don’t Mix (Even for Lawyers!)

    10 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Greg Podolak

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    Increases in U.S. Office Rents Led by San Jose and Dallas
    Corporate Profile


    The Blountstown, Florida Building Expert 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. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Blountstown'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.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Blountstown, Florida

    Massachusetts Court Holds Statute of Repose Bars Certain Asbestos-Related Construction Claims

    April 17, 2019 —
    In Stearns v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) addressed whether the six-year statute of repose for improvements to real property applies to long-tail tort claims, such as those caused by exposure to asbestos. Reasoning that the language of § 2B is clear, unambiguous and unequivocal, the SJC held that Mass. Gen. Laws. c. 260 § 2B does in fact bar all tort claims arising out of a deficiency or neglect in the design, planning, construction or general administration of an improvement to real property filed after the expiration of the six-year repose period. Additionally, the court affirmed that the time limitations imposed by the statute of repose may not be tolled for any reason six years after either the opening of the improvement for use or the owner taking possession of the improvement for occupation upon substantial completion, whichever may occur first. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy J. Keough, White and Williams LLP and Rochelle Gumapac, White and Williams LLP Mr. Keough may be contacted at Ms. Gumapac may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Packard Condominiums Settled with Kosene & Kosene Residential

    August 27, 2014 —
    Residents of the Packard Condominiums in Indianapolis, Indiana “have settled a two-year-old lawsuit with developer Kosene & Kosene Residential,” according to the Indianapolis Business Journal. The Homeowners association stated that “the agreement would lead to repayment of a construction loan and avoidance of a special assessment on residents.” The association claimed to have spent “$3 million on ‘renovation and remediation’ of subpar construction of the condo building,” reported the Indianapolis Business Journal. The article also declared that at least 25 subcontractors participated in the mediation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    DRCOG’s Findings on the Impact of Construction Defect Litigation Have Been Released (And the Results Should Not Surprise You)

    November 13, 2013 —
    The downward trend in attached-housing construction in Colorado is well-known and discussed often within the region’s construction, insurance, finance, and legal communities. In recent years, builders and insurers in particular have striven to bring greater awareness to local governments and lawmakers regarding the impact that construction defect lawsuits have on the builders’ ability to introduce desirable, affordable, yet cost-efficient attached-housing options, such as condominiums and townhomes, into the marketplace. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (“DRCOG”) has been aware of the builders’ and insurers’ plight, largely because of the impact that the scarcity of affordable attached-housing has had on their respective communities. On October 29th, DRCOG released its long-awaited Denver Metro Area Housing Diversity Study, prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., which investigated the factors contributing to the recent (downward) attached-housing development trends and conditions. The Study evaluated factors including changing financing and insurance requirements for builders and homebuyers, the impacts of foreclosures, changes in prospective homebuyer demographics, economic conditions which limit options for prospective homebuyers, and the costs and risks associated with construction defect regulations and lawsuits. Despite the retorts and rebukes of the naysayers, the negative impact of construction defect regulations and lawsuits on Colorado’s housing market is significant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Derek Lindenschmidt
    Derek Lindenschmidt can be contacted at

    South Carolina Couple Must Arbitrate Construction Defect Claim

    June 28, 2013 —
    The South Carolina Court of Appeals has rejected a claim by Sun City property owners that they were not bound by the arbitration clause in their purchase agreement. Roger and Mary Jo Carlson brought the claim against Del Webb Communities and Pulte Homes. About 140 homeowners are alleging problems in the community. According to the court, the Carlsons will have to go through arbitration with the companies over the alleged stucco defects to their home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    February 23, 2017 —
    Last week, I posted about how whistleblowers continue to receive large settlements related to DBE fraud. A somewhat recent case from the federal court in Maryland shows how whistleblowers are ferreting out DBE fraud on construction projects receiving any form of federal funding. The Case The case involves a bridge painting project in Maryland that was let by the Maryland State Highway Administration. The contract required the prime contractor to meet a 15% DBE participation goal. The prime contractor submitted a bid stating it would have 15.12% DBE participation. After it was awarded the contract, the prime contractor – as is typical – submitted additional forms certifying to the MSHA that 15.12% of its contract price would be performed by a DBE firm. The prime contractor indicated that one DBE subcontractor, Northeast Work and Safety Boats, LLC (“NWSB”), would perform the 15.12% of the work. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at

    Why Is California Rebuilding in Fire Country? Because You’re Paying for It

    March 14, 2018 —
    After last year’s calamity, officials are making the same decisions that put homeowners at risk in the first place. At the rugged eastern edge of Sonoma County, where new homes have been creeping into the wilderness for decades, Derek Webb barely managed to save his ranch-style resort from the raging fire that swept through the area last October. He spent all night fighting the flames, using shovels and rakes to push the fire back from his property. He was even ready to dive into his pool and breathe through a garden hose if he had to. His neighbors weren’t so daring—or lucky. On a recent Sunday, Webb wandered through the burnt remains of the ranch next to his. He’s trying to buy the land to build another resort. This doesn’t mean he thinks the area won’t burn again. In fact, he’s sure it will. But he doubts that will deter anyone from rebuilding, least of all him. “Everybody knows that people want to live here,” he says. “Five years from now, you probably won’t even know there was a fire.” As climate change creates warmer, drier conditions, which increase the risk of fire, California has a chance to rethink how it deals with the problem. Instead, after the state’s worst fire season on record, policymakers appear set to make the same decisions that put homeowners at risk in the first place. Driven by the demands of displaced residents, a housing shortage, and a thriving economy, local officials are issuing permits to rebuild without updating building codes. They’re even exempting residents from zoning rules so they can build bigger homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Flavelle, Bloomberg

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    February 06, 2019 —
    In a negligence action, the issue of whether a duty applies is a question of law. See Limones v. School Dist. of Lee County, 161 So.3d 384, 389 (Fla. 2015) (“[T]he existence of a duty is a legal question because duty is the standard to which the jury compares the conduct of the defendant.”); McCain v. Florida Power Corp., 593 So.2d 500, 502 (Fla. 1992) (“Since duty is a question of law, an appellate court obviously could reverse based on its purely legal conclusion that no such duty existed.”). Thus, the trial court determines, as a matter of law, whether a legal duty of care applies in a negligence action. Florida law recognizes the following four sources of duty: (1) statutes or regulations; (2) common law interpretations of those statutes or regulations; (3) other sources in the common law; and (4) the general facts of the case. See id. Oftentimes it is the fourth source – the general facts of the case – that comes into play to determine whether the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Client Alert: California’s Unfair Competition Law (B&P §17200) Preempted by Federal Workplace Safety Law

    September 24, 2014 —
    In Solus Industrial Innovations LLC v. Superior Court (No. G047661, filed 9/22/2014) (“Solus”) the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, held California’s Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §17200) is preempted by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (“Fed/OSHA”) because the Unfair Competition law, as approved by the United States Secretary of Labor, does not include any provision for civil enforcement of workplace safety standards by a state prosecutor through a complaint for penalties. Solus Industrial Innovations, LLC (“Solus”) is a plastics manufacturer. In 2007, Solus installed a residential water heater at its commercial facility in Orange County. The water heater exploded in March 2009, killing two workers. California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (“Cal/OSHA”) investigated and determined the explosion was caused by a failed safety valve and lack of any proper safety feature on the water heater. Cal/OSHA charged Solus with five violations of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. Because deaths were involved, Cal/OSHA forwarded the results of its investigation to the Orange County District Attorney. In March 2012, the Orange County District Attorney filed criminal charges against Solus’ plant manager and maintenance supervisor. The District Attorney also filed a civil action against Solus, including two causes of action for violation of California Business & Professions Code §17200 – the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”). The action sought civil penalties under the UCL in the amount of $2,500 per day, per employee, from November 29, 2007 through March 19, 2009. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys R. Bryan Martin, Yvette Davis and Kristian Moriarty Mr. Martin may be contacted at Ms. Davis may be contacted at Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of