BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projectsCambridge Massachusetts architectural engineering expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts hospital construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expertCambridge Massachusetts expert witnesses fenestrationCambridge Massachusetts construction safety expertCambridge Massachusetts slope failure expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Massachusetts Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cambridge Massachusetts

    No state license required for general contracting. Licensure required for plumbing and electrical trades. Companies selling home repair services must be registered with the state.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Builders Association of Central Massachusetts Inc
    Local # 2280
    51 Pullman Street
    Worcester, MA 01606

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Massachusetts Home Builders Association
    Local # 2200
    700 Congress St Suite 200
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Boston
    Local # 2220
    700 Congress St. Suite 202
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    North East Builders Assn of MA
    Local # 2255
    170 Main St Suite 205
    Tewksbury, MA 01876

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Western Mass
    Local # 2270
    240 Cadwell Dr
    Springfield, MA 01104

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Bristol-Norfolk Home Builders Association
    Local # 2211
    65 Neponset Ave Ste 3
    Foxboro, MA 02035

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders & Remodelers Association of Cape Cod
    Local # 2230
    9 New Venture Dr #7
    South Dennis, MA 02660

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Cambridge Massachusetts


    Up in Smoke - 5th Circuit Finds No Coverage for Hydrochloric Acid Spill Based on Pollution Exclusion

    Commercial Real Estate in 2023: A Snapshot

    Round and Round: Inside the Las Vegas Sphere

    Where Mechanic’s Liens and Contracts Collide

    Deescalating Hyper Escalation

    Insurer Must Defend Where Possible Continuing Property Damage Occurred

    BHA Attending the Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, TX

    Mediation Scheduled for Singer's Construction Defect Claims

    CGL Coverage for Liquidated Damages and the Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Veterans Day – Thank You for Your Service

    Nevada Insureds Can Rely on Extrinsic Facts to Show that An Insurer Owes a Duty to Defend

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning

    New Mexico Architect Is Tuned Into His State

    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows

    Skilled Labor Shortage Implications for Construction Companies

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor's Employee

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Rancosky Adopts Terletsky: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Sets Standard for Statutory Bad Faith Claims

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/22/24) – Federal Infrastructure Money, Hotel Development Pipelines, and Lab Space Construction

    Eleventh Circuit Holds that EPA Superfund Remedial Actions are Usually Entitled to the FTCA “Discretionary Function” Exemption

    Guarantor’s Liability on Partially Secured Debts – The Impacts of Pay Down Provisions in Serpanok Construction Inc. v. Point Ruston, LLC et al.

    Business Solutions Alert: Homeowners' Complaint for Breach of Loan Modification Agreement Can Proceed Past Pleading Stage

    Los Angeles Team Secures Summary Judgment for Hotel Owner & Manager in Tenant’s Lawsuit

    Contractors Prepare for a Strong 2021 Despite Unpredictability

    Traub Lieberman Chair Emeritus Awarded the 2022 Vince Donohue Award by the International Association of Claim Professionals

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Ruling On Certificates Of Merit And “Gist Of Action” May Make It More Difficult For An Architect Or Engineer To Seek An Early Dismissal

    Architect Plans to 3D-Print a Two-Story House

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Risk Spotter Searches Internal Data Lakes For Loaded Words

    EEOC Suit Alleges Site Managers Bullied Black Workers on NY Project

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    Seventh Circuit Confirms Additional Insured's Coverage for Alleged Construction Defects

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    The Benefits of Trash Talking: A Cautionary Tale of Demolition Gone Wrong

    TxDOT, Flatiron/Dragados Mostly Resolve Bridge Design Dispute

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    Attempt to Overrule Trial Court's Order to Produce Underwriting Manual Fails

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    Insured's Claim for Water Damage Dismissed with Leave to Amend

    Coronavirus, Force Majeure, and Delay and Time-Impact Claims
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts 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 more than 25 years 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
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    First Lumber, Now Drywall as Canada-U.S. Trade Tensions Escalate

    November 30, 2016 —
    A new trade dispute has broken out between Canada and the U.S. that threatens to raise prices in Canada’s already overheated housing markets. The Canada Border Services Agency imposed a provisional tariff as high as 277 percent on U.S. drywall imports in September after ruling that manufacturers were dumping the product, or selling it below the price in their home market, undercutting local suppliers. The tariff has raised the price of drywall, or gypsum board as it’s also called, by as much as 30 percent and is causing “chaos” and delays as contractors scramble for alternative sources. Some builders say the tariff could add as much as C$13,000 ($9,671) to the cost of a new home, which would amount to a C$2.6 billion increase to the roughly 200,000 homes built in Canada each year. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katie Dmitrieva, Bloomberg
    Ms. Dmitrieva may be followed on Twitter @katiadmi

    Loss Caused by Theft, Continuous Water Discharge Not Covered

    September 17, 2015 —
    The insured's claim for loss based on theft and water leaks was not covered under the property policy. SJP Props. v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97216 (E.D. Mo. July 27, 2015). SJP Properties bought and sold foreclosed properties. On July 13, 2006, it purchased at a foreclosure sale a property in St. Louis. The property was not inspected before or after the purchase, and sat vacant for more than two years. No one checked regularly on the property. The property was insured under a commercial property policy issued by Mount Vernon, effective from March 8, 2006 to March 8, 2009. The policy covered vandalism, but excluded loss caused by theft. An exception for the exclusion provided coverage for "building damage caused by the breaking in or exiting of burglars." The policy also excluded loss or damage caused by fungus, wet rot, dry rot and bacteria or water leaks for a period of 14 days or more. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Houston Office Secures Favorable Verdict in Trespass and Nuisance Case Involving Subcontractor’s Accidental Installation of Storm Sewer Pipe on Plaintiff’s Property

    June 12, 2023 —
    Houston, Texas (May 26, 2023) - Houston Partners Joelle Nelson and Matt Begley secured a defense verdict on behalf of a gasoline services company following a four-day trial in the 284th District Court of Montgomery County, Texas. In this case, Lewis Brisbois represented a client who hired a contractor to install a storm sewer line to mitigate flood risks to the client’s property. The contractor, however, deviated from the engineering plans and installed the storm sewer line on a neighboring property owned by the plaintiff. The storm sewer line then remained on the plaintiff’s property for five years while the parties attempted to negotiate potential solutions to the situation. The plaintiff refused multiple reasonable settlement attempts and ultimately sued the client and the contractor for continuous trespass and private nuisance. The contractor’s carrier denied coverage, making the client the target defendant. The matter proceeded to trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    City Council Authorizes Settlement of Basement Flooding Cases

    March 12, 2014 —
    Last July in Dearborn, Michigan, “torrential rain” caused flooding to hundreds of basements, according to Press & Guide. Of the 250 claims filed by residents, “the city determined that about 150 were caused by defects in its water or sewer lines. About 125 of the claims to be settled are for more than $3,000; 26 are for $3,000 or less.” Press & Guide reported that “Attorney Tarek Baydoun, who is representing some clients whose basements flooded, asked about recourse for ‘botched’ claims, and was concerned because the city hasn’t released the list of those with whom it is settling.” The Mayor, Jack O’Reilly, stated that the law department would release the list to the city council. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Strict Rules for Home Remodel Contracts in California

    June 06, 2018 —
    Home remodeling in California is governed by strict contracting laws intended to protect consumers. The Contractors State Licensing Board, (“CSLB”) is particularly concerned about contractors working without permits, contractors taking payment in excess of the value of the work complete–including deposits in excess of $1,000–and contractors refusing to complete projects. They are also concerned about contractors who fail to comply with the Home Improvement Contract (“HIC”) laws. At a minimum, it takes six pages of contract language for an HIC to comply with California law. Most contractors do not get it right, leaving themselves exposed to license discipline, misdemeanor criminal prosecution, and void contracts. The stakes are high, and contractors are advised to learn and comply with the HIC laws. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel F. McLennon, Smith Currie
    Mr. McLennon may be contacted at dfmclennon@smithcurrie.com

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    December 31, 2014 —
    Construction projects pose unique challenges, including keeping costs within budget, meeting project deadlines, and coordinating the work of numerous contractors and subcontractors in the wake of inevitable design revisions and changes to the plans. Anticipating potential project challenges and negotiating contract provisions before commencing work on a project is critical for all parties. Careful planning should reduce the number of contract disputes. This, in turn, can facilitate the completion of a project within budget and on schedule. “Changes” Clauses in Construction Contracts Most commercial construction contracts have a clause addressing changes to the contract. A “changes” clause typically requires the mutual agreement of the parties on the scope of any modifications to the contract, as well as the effect on the contract price and timeframe for the work to be performed. This results in what is generally referred to as a “change order.” Many projects have a large number of change orders, which can result in significant cost overruns and delays to the project if the contract contains a complicated change order process. Therefore, in order to minimize cost overruns and project delays, it is crucial to keep the change order process as simplified and streamlined as possible. In the most basic terms, change orders memorialize modifications to the original contract, and typically alter the contract's price, scope of work, and/or completion dates. A typical change order is a written document prepared by the owner or its design professional, and signed by the owner, design professional, and affected contractors and subcontractors. An executed change order indicates the parties’ agreement as to what changes are taking place, including approval for additional costs and schedule impacts. While the reasons for change orders and the parties initiating them may vary, all change orders have one feature in common. Effective change orders alter the original contract and become part of the contract. Therefore, from a legal standpoint, change orders must be approached with the same caution and forethought as the original contract. Practice Pointers for Change Orders In light of the foregoing, some practice pointers for change orders in commercial construction contracts are as follows:
    • Carefully Negotiate and Draft Change Order Provisions in the Original Contract. A carefully negotiated and drafted “changes” clause that accounts for “unexpected circumstances” or “hidden conditions” can protect the parties from downstream costly disputes.
    • Immediately Address Changes by Following the Change Order Process, Including Obtaining Necessary Signatures. Regardless if you are an owner, general contractor or subcontractor, you should address any proposed change order immediately. Even if a decision maker gives “verbal” approval to go ahead with changed work, the work should not proceed without following the change order process in the original contract. This includes making sure to obtain any necessary signatures for the change order, if at all possible.
    • Analyze the Plans and Specifications to Determine Whether “Changes” are Within the Scope of the Original Contract, or Whether They are Extra Work. Prior to entering an original contract, it is imperative that the parties review the plans and specifications for ambiguities regarding work included in the original contract, versus potential extra work that would require a change order. This is important because a careful review of the plans and specifications sometimes reveals that work believed to be a change order is, in fact, original work, or vice versa.
    • Make Sure Requests and Approvals for Change Orders are Done by an Authorized Representative. When a party requests or gives its approval to a change order, it is important to confirm the request or approval came from an authorized representative.
    • Avoid Vague and Open-Ended Change Orders. Indeed, the vaguer a change order, the more likely it can lead to a dispute. Vague and open-ended change orders, including change orders that provide for payment on a time and materials basis, can be difficult for an owner to budget and schedule. This can lead to disputes as to cost and/or time extensions.
    • Oral Assurances for Payment Without a Signed Change Order May Not Be Recoverable. When a party provides verbal assurances to another party for extra work without following the change order process, there is a much higher likelihood that disputes will occur. Although there is case law that may allow a contractor to recover for extra work in private contracts based on oral promises, the parties should avoid placing themselves in such a legal position. Notably, in public contracts, a contractor may not be able to recover for any extra work without a signed changed order, even with verbal assurances of payment from the owner.
    About the Author: John E. Bowerbank, Newmeyer & Dillion Mr. Bowerbank is a partner in the Newport Beach office and practices in the areas of business, insurance, real estate, and construction litigation. You can reach John at john.bowerbank@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Difficulty in Defending Rental Supplier’s Claim Under Credit Application

    October 11, 2021 —
    In construction, one of the easiest claims to prove from a burden of proof standpoint is that of a supplier, particularly a rental equipment supplier. Oftentimes, these claims are more in the realm of a collection claim because a rental supplier will generally be able to establish that a party opened an account with them, signed a credit application and personal guaranty, and equipment was rented and even delivered to a specific jobsite during set dates. Defending these claims is not so easy. And even if there is a defense as it relates to some amounts, there needs to be an upside challenging those amounts when factoring in the attorney’s fees, costs, and interest on the other amounts and on continuing the dispute. An example of the difficulty in defending these claims from rental suppliers can be found in the recent case of Custom Design Expo, Inc. v. Synergy Rents, Inc., 2021 WL 4125806 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). Here, a contractor rented equipment (e.g, forklifts) from a supplier. The equipment was rented on an open account and the contractor signed a personal guaranty. The supplier sued the contractor for about $81,000 that remained unpaid. The supplier appeared to waste no time and moved for summary judgment with an affidavit from its credit manager. The credit manager affirmed that the contractor executed a credit application for purposes of renting equipment on an open account, the application contained a personal guaranty, and the credit application formed the basis of a contract. The credit manager authenticated the credit application and affirmed that the contractor owed it about $81,000 in unpaid amounts for rental equipment that was furnished under the credit application. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    More Reminders that the Specific Contract Terms Matter

    January 24, 2022 —
    If there is a theme I have pounded upon here at Construction Law Musings in the over 13 years of posting, it is that the specific terms of your construction contracts will make a huge difference. While there have been reminders galore, a case from the Eastern District of Virginia presented another wrinkle on this theme. The wrinkle? A factoring company. In CJM Financial, Inc. v. Leebcor Services, LLC et. al., the Court examined this scenario (though it went into more detail than I will here): Leebcorp hired a subcontractor, Maston Creek Services to provide certain construction services under two separate contracts. Maston then hired CJM, a factoring company, and assigned CJM its receivables and the right to collect those receivables. We wouldn’t be discussing this case if all had worked out as planned, so you likely anticipate at least some of what came next. The short story is that Matson failed to pay some of its suppliers and Leebcorp exercised its termination rights under those contracts when Matson refused to cure. In the interim, CJM had paid part of certain payment applications to Matson in compliance with the factoring agreement. When Leebcorp failed to pay CJM for Matson’s work, CJM exercised its assigned rights to collect the receivables and sued Leebcorp for breach of contract. In response, Leebcorp counterclaimed for, among other counts including civil conspiracy, breach of contract based on Matson’s failure to perform. CJM moved to dismiss the counterclaims. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com