BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts roofing and waterproofing expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness structural engineerCambridge Massachusetts construction project management expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness consultantCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts consulting architect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts civil engineering 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


    Court Again Defines Extent of Contractor’s Insurance Coverage

    Washington Court Tunnels Deeper Into the Discovery Rule

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces New Partner Bahaar Cadambi

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Three Recent Cases Strike Down Liquidated Damages Clauses In Settlement Agreements…A Trend Or An Aberration?

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    City in Ohio Sues Over Alleged Roof Defects

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    Obama Asks for $302 Billion to Fix Bridges and Potholes

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Insurance Policies and Indemnity Provisions Are Not the Same

    Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Growing Optimism Among Home Builders

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Waive Not, Want Not: Waivers and Releases on California Construction Projects

    California Courts Call a “Time Out” During COVID-19 –New Emergency Court Rules on Civil Litigation

    Architecture, Robotics, and the Importance of Human Interaction – An Interview with Prof. Kathrin Dörfler

    Construction Defect Reform Bill Passes Colorado Senate

    First-Time Homebuyers Make Biggest Share of Deals in 17 Years

    Excess Must Defend After Primary Improperly Refuses to Do So

    Sewage Flowing in London’s River Thames Draws Green Bond Demand

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    Indiana Appellate Court Allows Third-Party Spoliation Claim to Proceed

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    Appellate Court of Maryland Construes Notice Conditions of A312 Performance Bond in Favor of Surety

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    Louisiana 13th in List of Defective Bridges

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    Millennials Skip the Ring and Mortgage

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    State Audit Questions College Construction Spending in LA

    Public Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    ASCE's Architectural Engineering Institute Announces Winners of 2021 AEI Professional Project Award

    Tech Focus: Water Tech Getting Smarter

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    The Indemnification Limitation in Section 725.06 does not apply to Utility Horizontal-Type Projects

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    Earth Movement Exclusion Precludes Coverage

    Weslaco, Texas Investigating Possible Fraudulent Contractor Invoices

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jessica Garland as Its Newest Partner
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Cambridge'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
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    January 21, 2019 —
    In Mechling v. Asbestos Defendants (No. A150132, filed 12/11/18), a California appeals court affirmed the trial court’s grant of an insurer’s motion to set aside default judgments entered against its defunct insured pursuant to the trial court’s inherent, equitable power to set aside defaults on the ground of extrinsic mistake, thereby allowing the insurer to intervene and defend its own interests in the case. In Mechling, Fireman’s Fund insured Associated Insulation of California, which was named as a defendant in asbestos litigation filed in 2009. Associated had ceased operating in 1974, but was somehow successfully served with the complaint and defaulted, leading to default judgments of several million dollars. Notice of the judgments was served on Associated but not Fireman’s Fund. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The G2G Year in Review: 2019

    February 03, 2020 —
    As we kick off the new decade, we wanted to share the top five most-read articles of 2019 from Gravel2Gavel. The most-read blog posts covered 2019 real estate and construction industry trends ranging from affordable housing to the new State Bill 35 (SB 35) to sustainability in modern real estate. Our posts provided deep insight and detailed case studies, and summarized hot topics that addressed the legal implications and exciting disruptions that are affecting the industry. We hope you enjoy the roundup:
    1. Assessing SB 35—Success or Failure? by Robert Howard, Alexander Walker and Matt Olhausen Robert, Alex and Matt examined the newly implemented SB 35 and highlighted real examples of SB 35 in action.
    2. Update Your California Release Provisions to Include Amended Section 1542 Language by William S. Hale, P.E. Bill Hale encouraged readers to update their California release provisions to include Amended Section 1542 Language, which ensures that the releasing party is consciously releasing both known and unknown claims that may be later discovered.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    May 24, 2021 —
    The recent opinion out of the Eastern District Court of Virginia, Dickson v. Forney Enterprises, Inc., 2021 WL 1536574 (E.D.Virginia 2021), demonstrates that the federal Miller Act is not designed to protect ALL that perform work on a federal construction project. This is because NOT ALL work is covered under the Miller Act. In this case, a professional engineer was subcontracted by a prime contractor to serve on site in a project management / superintendent capacity. The prime contractor’s scope of work was completed by January 31, 2019. However, the prime contractor was still required to inventory certain materials on site, which was performed by the engineer. The engineer claimed it was owed in excess of $400,000 and filed a Miller Act payment bond lawsuit on February 5, 2020 (more than a year after the project was completed). 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

    How to Determine the Deadline for Recording a California Mechanics Lien

    September 17, 2015 —
    The California Mechanics Lien is one of the most valuable collection devices available to contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who are unpaid for work performed and materials supplied in relation to a California private works construction project. The mechanics lien allows the claimant to sell the property where the work was performed in order to obtain payment. As noted below, in order to pursue this remedy, certain deadlines must be met. Know Your Mechanics Lien Filing Deadlines Generally Working within deadlines is absolutely crucial to preserving mechanics lien rights under California law. The deadlines differ, depending on whether you are a ”direct” contractor, also known as “original” or “prime” contractor (one who contracts directly with the property owner) or a subcontractor or material supplier. The primary differences are that the direct contractor is only required to serve the “Preliminary Notice” on the Construction Lender (Civil Code section 8200-8216), whereas the subcontractor and material supplier must serve not only the Construction Lender, but also the Owner and Direct Contractor (see Civil Code section 8200(e)). Another difference is that a direct contractor has a longer period of time in which to record a mechanics lien after a valid “notice of completion” or a “notice of cessation” has been recorded (Civil Code sections 8180-8190), (60 days for original contractors as compared to 30 days for subcontractors and suppliers – See Civil Code sections 8412 and 8414). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, The Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Mass Timber Reduces Construction’s Carbon Footprint, But Introduces New Risk Scenarios

    March 04, 2024 —
    Mass timber has the potential to be a critical building component for the cities of the near future given the need for the construction sector to reduce its reliance on concrete and steel to lower its Co2 emissions. However, as this market grows and mass timber buildings evolve to greater heights, the construction risk landscape will also be transformed, bringing risk management challenges for companies, according to the new Emerging Risk Trend Talk report from Allianz Commercial. “The emergence of mass timber as a sustainable construction alternative represents a significant opportunity for the building sector to reduce its carbon footprint while also satisfying a demand for a material that is more cost-efficient but as durable as steel and concrete,” says Michael Bruch, Global Head of Risk Advisory Services at Allianz Commercial. “However, in any industry, deployment of new materials or processes can result in new risk scenarios, potential defects, or unexpected safety consequences, as well as bringing benefits, and mass timber is no different. Given this market’s expected future growth, companies should do all they can to develop a greater understanding of their exposures including fire, water damage, repetitive loss scenarios and even termite infestation, and ensure they have robust loss prevention measures in place to combat these.” The need for mass timber The building and construction sector is among the largest contributors to Co2 emissions, accounting for over 34% of energy demand and around 37% of energy and process related Co2 emissions in 2021 [1]. Given emissions reduction is essential to meet climate change commitments around the world, the need for more sustainable solutions in the built environment has become increasingly important, driven by growing investor and consumer concerns, and legislation, regulation and reporting requirements evolving quickly in many jurisdictions around the world. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Allianz Commercial

    Exploring Architects’ Perspectives on AI: A Survey of Fears and Hopes

    March 19, 2024 —
    RIBA, the Royal Institute of British Architects, ran a survey in late 2023 with 500 respondents on the impact of AI on their profession. The study also explored the near-term outlook for AI adoption and use. The results reveal divided opinions among architects. A popular view is that AI threatens the profession, even though a larger portion sees tools like AI as necessary in the coming years. The Present Use of AI The respondents were asked, for the projects they are currently working on, how often their practice used AI in any way. In all, 41% said that they use AI to some degree. Of those, 43% agree that AI has improved efficiency in the architectural design processes, while 24% disagree. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Ethical Limits on Preparing a Witness for Deposition or Trial

    October 28, 2024 —
    In this week’s blog post, we are going to take a brief look at ethical issues associated with preparing a witness for a deposition or to testify at trial. Most attorneys would agree that it is permissible to meet with a witness before the witness’s deposition to discuss what to expect. On the other hand, there is no question that advising a witness to provide false testimony would be improper. But what about the area in between those two extremes? For instance, can an attorney suggest to a witness how to phrase answers to anticipated questions that, while true, might not be the way the witness would have answered the question absent the attorney’s coaching? A little over a year ago, the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued ABA Formal Opinion 508: The Ethics of Witness Preparation. The opinion provides certain examples of things that are and are not permissible in preparing a witness for a deposition or trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    Court Rules that Damage From Squatter’s Fire is Not Excluded as Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Ong v. Fire Insurance Exchange (No. B252773, filed 4/3/15), a California appeals court ruled that a vacancy exclusion limited to damage caused by “vandalism or malicious mischief” did not bar coverage for damage to a vacant property caused by a warming fire purposely started by a transient that got out of control and spread to other parts of the property. In Ong, the insured’s rental premises had been vacated by tenants and the utilities turned off. Nearly two years later, the insured submitted a claim for fire damage that had just occurred. An investigator reported finding signs that a squatter had been living in the building, stating that: “[I]t appears the fire may have been initiated as the result of an uncontrolled warming fire started by an unauthorized inhabitant.” The investigator found firewood and a mattress, and concluded that holes burned in the floor were the result of the squatter attempting to throw burning wood out the door when the fire got out of control. The policy excluded vandalism as follows: “We do not cover direct or indirect loss from: . . . 4. Vandalism or Malicious Mischief, breakage of glass and safety glazing materials if the dwelling has been vacant for more than 30 consecutive days . . . just before the loss. A dwelling under construction is not considered vacant.” The term “Vandalism” was not defined in the policy. The insurer denied coverage based on the exclusion, stating: “Our investigation indicates that this loss was the result of vandalism. A trespasser entered the vacant dwelling and intentionally set a fire on the kitchen floor.” Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Valerie A. Moore, Christopher Kendrick and Colin T. Murphy Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com. Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Mr. Murphy may be contacted at cmurphy@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of