BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts structural engineering expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts construction scheduling expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildingsCambridge Massachusetts defective construction expertCambridge Massachusetts consulting engineersCambridge Massachusetts building envelope 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


    Termination for Convenience Clauses: Maybe More Than Just Convenience

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Nebraska Court of Appeals Vacates Arbitration Award for Misconduct

    There’s an Unusual Thing Happening in the Housing Market

    Labor Code § 2708 Presumption of Employer Negligence is Not Applicable Against Homeowners Who Hired Unlicensed Painting Company

    EEOC Chair Issues New Report “Building for the Future: Advancing Equal Employment Opportunity in the Construction Industry”

    Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency Under Scrutiny

    Why Construction Firms Should Think Differently on the Issue of Sustainability

    Contractor Sentenced to 7 Years for “Hail Damage” Fraud

    Eleventh Circuit Finds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Claims

    Insurance Law Alert: Ambiguous Producer Agreement Makes Agent-Broker Status a Jury Question

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    Required Contract Provisions for Construction Contracts in California

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Judgment for Bad Faith after Insured's Home Destroyed by Fire

    Another Colorado District Court Refuses to Apply HB 10-1394 Retroactively

    Colorado’s Abbreviated Legislative Session Offers Builders a Reprieve

    MBIA Seeks Data in $1 Billion Credit Suisse Mortgage Suit

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Consequential Damages Flowing from Construction Defect Not Covered Under Florida Law

    Contractors Pay Heed: The Federal Circuit Clarifies Two Important Issues For Bid Protestors

    Las Vegas Stadium for Athletics, Now $1.75B Project, Gains Key OK

    Homebuilding Design Goes 3D

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Powering Goal Congruence in Construction Through Smart Contracts

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Coverage Gap Dispute

    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009

    New Executive Order: Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    Key Amendments to Insurance Claims-Handling Regulations in Puerto Rico

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    Giant Gas Pipeline Owner, Contractor in $900M Payment Battle

    Coverage for Construction Defect Barred by Contractual-Liability Exclusion

    Agrihoods: The Best of Both Worlds

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    Congratulations to BWB&O Partner John Toohey and His Fellow Panel Members on Their Inclusion in West Coast Casualty’s 2022 Program!

    An Architect Uses AI to Explore Surreal Black Worlds

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    BWBO Celebrating Attorney Award and Two New Partners

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named a Best Law Firm in 2019 in Multiple Practice Areas by U.S. News-Best Lawyers

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

    Fact of Settlement Communications in Underlying Lawsuits is Not Ground for Anti-SLAPP Motion in Subsequent Bad Faith Lawsuit
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Cambridge's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

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

    October 19, 2020 —
    The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that an insurer was not obligated to pay damages associated with a hydrochloric acid spill based on a pollution exclusion in the policy. In Burroughs Diesel, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of America,1 a trucking company sued its property insurer, Travelers Indemnity Company of America (“Travelers”) when it refused to pay a claim for a storage tank leak which resulted in over 5,000 gallons of hydrochloric acid entering the property and causing significant damage to buildings, vehicles, tools, and equipment. The acid was initially dispensed in liquid form, but quickly became a cloud that engulfed the property. Travelers denied coverage for the claim based on the pollution exclusion because “acids” fell within the policy’s definition of “pollutants.” The trucking company sued Travelers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, alleging breach of contract and breach of good faith and fair dealing for refusing to pay the claim. The trucking company argued that coverage was warranted because there is an exception to the pollution exclusion if “the discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release or escape is itself caused by any of the ‘specified causes of loss,’” and the hydrochloric acid cloud was a form of “smoke,” which is a specified cause of loss covered by the policy. The District Court entered summary judgment in favor of Travelers, finding that the trucking company failed to demonstrate that an exception to the pollution exclusion applied. The trucking company appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Reprinted courtesy of Kerianne E. Kane, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Ms. Kane may be contacted at kek@sdvlaw.com Mr. Jordan may be contacted at dgj@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected

    November 14, 2018 —
    The Transbay Joint Powers Authority announced on Oct. 10 that emergency remedial work at the 4.5-block-long Salesforce Transit Center in San Francisco, on the closed Fremont Street between Howard and Mission streets, will continue into early next week. The block, which crosses under the hub, will reopen to traffic and the public on Wednesday, Oct. 17, rather than Oct. 12, as previously announced, says TJPA. The transit center itself, which opened in August, is temporarily closed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, ENR
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com

    Why Metro Atlanta Is the Poster Child for the US Housing Crisis

    January 04, 2023 —
    Last year, the Federal Reserve declared that not one of the 13 counties that make up metro Atlanta qualified as an affordable housing market. In many places, monthly housing costs consume more than 40% of homeowners’ incomes, well beyond the 30% threshold that the Federal Reserve uses to monitor market affordability. Accelerating housing prices have been the narrative for virtually every major US metro lately, but Atlanta is somewhat “paradigmatic” of the trend, according to Georgia State University urban studies professor Dan Immergluck. Since arriving in Atlanta in 2005, Immergluck has been tracking and documenting the direction of metro Atlanta’s housing conditions, focusing on segregation and gentrification patterns. His new book, Red Hot City: Housing, Race and Exclusion in 21st-Century Atlanta, released in October, is the culmination of much of that scholarship. What Red Hot City reveals is that while exorbitant house prices are typically the result of market forces, Atlanta can blame a lot of its own policy decisions over the last 20 years, particularly as it pertains to large civic projects like the BeltLine and Centennial Yards, a massive new development planned for south downtown Atlanta. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brentin Mock, Bloomberg

    Colorado Nearly Triples Damages Caps for Cases Filed in 2025, Allows Siblings to File Wrongful Death Claims

    July 22, 2024 —
    Denver, Colo. (June 13, 2024) - On June 3, 2024, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed HB24-1472 to increase the damages caps for personal injury and wrongful death claims. The law nearly triples the amounts available to plaintiffs, which will continue to increase for inflationary adjustments beginning in 2028 and every two years thereafter. These new damages caps affect not only claims that accrue in 2025 and beyond, but they also change the caps for any civil cases filed on or after January 1, 2025. This law was enacted as a compromise to a ballot measure that would have removed any cap on damages. The new caps are as follows:
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for personal injuries will be $1.5 million.
    • The cap on noneconomic damages for wrongful death will be $2.125 million.
    Plaintiffs are likely to delay filing new actions through the rest of 2024 as long as they are not up against a statute of limitations deadline. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amy Johnson, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Johnson may be contacted at Amy.Johnson@lewisbrisbois.com

    Substitutions On a Construction Project — A Specification Writer Responds

    July 03, 2022 —
    In response to the post about Substitute Materials on a construction project, Phil Kabza explains how his company, SpecGuy, handles tracking of all such materials on a project. Phil writes: Excellent and important topic, about which there is much confusion among design professionals and contractors. We try to maintain definitions for:
    • Pre-bid requests for prior approval of proposed comparable products where products are named in the specifications
    • True pre-bid substitution requests that present an alternate type of product from that specified (ie., not “comparable” but perhaps suitable)
    • Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
      Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

      Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

      November 13, 2023 —
      In a case of first impression, the First Division of the Colorado Court of Appeals recently reviewed whether parties may contractually alter the accrual time established by Colorado’s statute of limitations for construction defect actions, C.R.S. § 13-80-104, in South Conejos Sch. Dist. RE-10 v. Wold Architects, Inc., 2023 COA 85 (2023), decided on September 21, 2023. The Court held that sophisticated parties may contractually alter the accrual time standards, enlarging the accrual time as was the issue in this case. Notably, the Court’s decision was made in the context of commercial construction, not residential. The issue in South Conejos Sch. Dist. RE-10 arose from the construction of a school in Antonito, Colorado. Prior to construction, the South Conejos School District RE-10 (the “School District”) and Wold Architects, Inc. (“Wold”) entered a contract that provided: Unless a longer period is provided by law, any action against [Wold] brought to recover damages for deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction or observation of construction or for injury to person or property shall be brought within two years after the claim for relief arises and is discovered by [the District]; … “Discovered” as used herein means detection and knowledge by [the District] of the defect in the improvement that ultimately causes the injury, when such defect is of a substantial or significant nature. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Hal Baker, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
      Mr. Baker may be contacted at baker@hhmrlaw.com

      Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

      February 10, 2012 —

      A judge has ruled that a plaintiff can go forward with her suit that she was injured by a defective archway during a birthday party. A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeals issued this ruling on January 23, 2012, in the case of Trujillo v. Cosio.

      Ms. Trujillo attended a birthday party at the home of Maria Cosio and Joel Verduzco. A piñata was hung between a tree and a brick archway. Ms. Trujillo went to get candy that had fallen from the piñata, during which the archway fell on her hand. Subsequent examination of the archway showed that it had not been “properly anchored to the supporting pillars to protect the arch from falling.”

      Ms. Cosio and Mr. Verduzco argued that they could not have been aware of the defective nature of the archway’s construction, as it had been built at the request of the prior property owner. The structure was constructed without building permits. Mark Burns, a civil engineer testifying for the plaintiff, said that “a reasonable property owner would have thoroughly tested the archway to ensure it was capable of withstanding such horizontal forces before allowing children to enter into the area.” Mr. Burns noted that twenty rope pulls would have been sufficient to demonstrate the structure’s instability.

      The trial court rejected Mr. Burn’s statements, finding that the respondents did not have any knowledge of the defect and that a visual inspection should have sufficed. The court noted that this a triable issue, whether visual inspection suffices, or whether the property owners should have done as Mr. Burns suggested and yank a rope twenty times. The court noted that “although a jury may ultimately disagree with Burn’s opinion, it was supported by sufficient foundation and was not speculative.”

      The opinion was written by Judge Flier, with Judges Rubin and Grimes concurring.

      Read the court’s decison…

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

      Investigation of Orange County Landslide

      June 02, 2016 —
      On May 29th, a landslide occurred in Newport Beach, California “about 100 yards below homes on Tidal Surf, Newport Beach Battalion Chief Justin Carr” according to the Orange County Register. Carr stated that the “slide measured about 150 yards wide and about 40 feet in length.” A building inspector and a geologist inspected the site to determine the danger, if any, to the homes in the neighborhood. The Orange County register reported that it has not been determined whether a recent earthquake in the area caused the landslide. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of