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


    Bid Bonds: The First Preventative Measure for Your Project

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    Who Would Face Liability For Oroville Dam Management: Brett Moore Authors Law360 Article

    Ortega Outbids Pros to Build $10 Billion Property Empire

    School District Settles Construction Lawsuit with Additional Million

    General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    In Massachusetts, the Statute of Repose Applies to Consumer Protection Claims Against Building Contractors

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    NYC Shuts 9 Pre-Kindergartens for Health, Safety Issues

    3M PFAS Water Settlement Could Reach $12.5B

    Washington First State to Require Electric Heat Pumps

    SEC Proposes Rule Requiring Public Firms to Report Climate Risks

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    The Rise of Modular Construction – Impacts for Consideration

    Pulled from the Swamp: EPA Wetland Determination Now Judicially Reviewable

    A Brief Primer on Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien When the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    Protect Against Design Errors With Owners Protective Professional Indemnity Coverage

    Extreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and Deadly

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

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Construction Resumes after Defects

    Coverage for Collapse Ordered on Summary Judgment

    There is No Claims File Privilege in Florida, Despite What Insurers Want You to Think

    Is the Event You Are Claiming as Unforeseeable Delay Really Unforeseeable?

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    Make Your Business Great Again: Steven Cvitanovic Authors Construction Today Article

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    Material Prices Climb…And Climb…Are You Considering A Material Escalation Provision?

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Understanding the Real Estate and Tax Implications of Florida's Buyer Ban Law

    Insured's Expert Qualified, Judgment for Coverage Affirmed

    Allegations Confirm Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims

    Inside New York’s Newest Architectural Masterpiece for the Mega-Rich

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    Homebuilders Offer Hope for U.K. Economy

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    OSHA’s COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard Is in Flux

    Contractor Prevailing Against Subcontractor On Common Law Indemnity Claim

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Insurer Not Required to Show Prejudice from an Insured’s Late Notice When the Parties Contract for a Specific Reporting Period

    Is Settling a Bond Claim in the Face of a Seemingly Clear Statute of Limitations Defense Bad Faith?

    Construction Defect Not an Occurrence in Ohio

    Designers George Yabu and Glenn Pushelberg Discuss One57’s Ultra-Luxury Park Hyatt
    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

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

    February 11, 2019 —
    In its recent decision in Clarendon National Ins. Co. v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., 2019 WL 134614 (D. Mass. Jan. 8, 2019), the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts had occasion to consider the application of a prior knowledge provision in the context of a claim for mold and water-related bodily injury and property damage. Philadelphia insured a condominium property management company under a general liability insurance policy for the period September 1, 2007 through September 1, 2008. In 2009, the insured was sued by a unit owner alleging bodily injury and property damage resulting from toxic mold conditions resulting from leaks that had been identified in her unit as early as 2004. Notably, the complaint alleged that mold was identified in 2006 and that repair efforts were undertaken, but that these efforts all proved unsuccessful. Plaintiff alleged that she was forced to vacate her apartment in 2008 as a result of the conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Precedent-Setting ‘Green’ Apartments in Kansas City

    September 17, 2015 —
    According to the Kansas City Star, the Missouri riverfront apartment development, Second and Delaware, is being constructed with “greener-than-green technology” and features the following: “Sixteen-inch-thick concrete walls. Rooftop gardens. A 90 percent reduction in energy use compared to current building codes.” The two buildings “will comprise the largest U.S. multifamily apartment project using Passive House Institute-certified construction, a system that’s more energy-efficient than the highest LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) building standard.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    February 26, 2015 —
    David Belasco v. Gary Loren Wells et al. (2015) B254525 OVERVIEW In a decision published on February 17, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal made clear that settlement agreements containing waivers of unknown claims in connection with a construction of a property, absent fraud or misrepresentation, will be upheld. In brief, the homeowner plaintiff had made a claim against the builder pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 896 (“Right to Repair”) and settled for a cash payment and obtained a Release of all Claims including for all known and unknown claims. The court held that homeowner’s subsequent construction defect claim was barred pursuant to the terms and conditions of the earlier release. DISCUSSION Plaintiff and Appellant, David Belasco ("Belasco"), purchased a newly construction home in Manhattan Beach from builder Gary Loren Wells ("Wells"). Two years after purchasing the property, Belasco filed a Complaint for construction defects, which eventually resulted in settlement between the parties. The settlement agreement included a California Civil Code Section 1524 waiver of all known or unknown claims with the word "claims" defined in part as “any and all known and unknown construction defects." Six years later in 2012, Belasco filed a Complaint alleging a claim, amongst others, that the defective and leaky roof breached the statutory warranty on new construction under California Civil Code section 896 ("Right to Repair Act"). Relying on San Diego Hospice v. County of San Diego (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1048, Wells and Wells' surety, American Contractors Indemnity Company (collectively "Wells"), filed a motion for summary judgment contending that the 2012 action was barred by the settlement of Belasco’s prior Complaint against Wells for construction defects to his home. When the trial court ruled in favor of Wells, Belasco appealed. Belasco, a patent attorney, made the following contentions:(1) the general release and section 1542 wavier in the settlement agreement for patent construction defects is not a "reasonable release" of a subsequent claim for latent construction defects within the meaning of section 929 and the “Right to Repair” Act; (2) a reasonable release can only apply to a "particular violation" and not to a latest defect under the language of section945.5, subdivision (f), and the settlement was too vague to be valid because it does not reference a "particular violation;" (3) section 932 of the California Civil Code specifically authorizes an action on "[s]subsequently discovered claims of unmet standards;" (4) public policy prohibits use of a general release and section 1542 waiver to bar a subsequent claim for latent residential construction defects; and (5) a genuine issue of material fact exists concerning Belasco's fraud and negligence claims that would have voided the settlement pursuant to section 1668. Pursuant to the "Right to Repair Act" Section 929 subsection (a), a builder can make a cash offer in lieu of a repair and the homeowner is free to accept or reject such offer. Section 929subsection (b) goes on to state that
    "[t]he builder may obtain a reasonable release in exchange for the cash payment. The builder may negotiate the terms and conditions of any reasonable release in terms of scope and consideration in conjunction with a cash payment under this chapter."
    The Second District Court of Appeal ruled that the prior cash settlement, with a release and section 1524 wavier, was a "reasonable release" under the language of California Civil Code Section 929. On multiple occasions, the Court noted that Belasco is an attorney and was represented by an attorney during the negotiation of the settlement agreement. By executing the agreement with express language regarding what claims were to be release, Belasco released Wells of "any and all claims" due to "any and all known and unknown construction defects." The Court reasoned that because Belasco is an attorney in his own right, he should have understood the import of the Section 1542 waiver and had the opportunity to reject or revise the settlement agreement prior to binding himself to it. The Court further found that the agreement "could not have been more clear" regarding the waiver of all unknown and known construction defect claims and therefore was not vague. Belasco's additional contentions were found to be without merit because Belasco availed himself of the statutory remedy of a cash settlement in lieu of repairs and voluntarily entered into a negotiated settlement agreement. Lastly, Belasco failed to present any evidence regarding his misrepresentation claim. When a homeowner files a "Right to Repair Act" claim, often it seems that only two options exist: either repair the alleged defects or go to court. However, Belasco is a reminder to builders that the "Right to Repair Act" does offer an avenue for settlement. The Second District Court of Appeal presented a clear, unqualified opinion regarding the validity and enforceability of settlement agreements releasing all known or unknown construction defects in a single family home case. The Court will hold parties to the settlements they agree to. This is especially so when one of the parties is an attorney and provides deposition testimony expressly acknowledging that he understood the scope of the agreement. Attorneys for builders should always include a waiver of all known and unknown claims, which pursuant to Belasco and San Diego Hospice, will ensure that any future claims at the property will be effectively barred by the terms of the settlement agreement. Reprinted courtesy of Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger attorneys Richard H. Glucksman, Jon A. Turigliatto and David A. Napper Mr. Glucksman may be contacted at rglucksman@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Turigliatto may be contacted at jturigliatto@cgdrblaw.com Mr. Napper may be contacted at dnapper@cgdrblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recommencing Construction on a Project due to a Cessation or Abandonment

    October 26, 2017 —
    There are instances where the owner of a construction project terminates its general contractor prior to the completion of the project. There are instances where the owner suspends the work prior to the completion of the project, meaning there is a cessation in the construction. And, there are instances where the project is simply abandoned. I have been involved in all instances, and the owner’s reasons vary…from an owner claiming a termination for default, termination for convenience, or a suspension or abandonment due to the market or financial factors. Regardless of the owner’s reasoning, at some point—hopefully—the owner will want to resume or, more properly stated, recommence construction and complete the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    Vegas Hi-Rise Not Earthquake Safe

    July 12, 2011 —

    If an earthquake hit Las Vegas, the Harmon Tower would not withstand it. A report from Weidlinger Associates told MGM Resorts that “in a code-level earthquake, using either the permitted or current code specified loads, it is likely that critical structural members in the tower will fail and become incapable of supporting gravity loads, leading to a partial or complete collapse of the tower.” The inspection came at the request of county officials, according to the article in Forbes.

    According to Ronald Lynn, directory of the building division in the county’s development services division, “these deficiencies, in their current state, make the building uninhabitable.” The county is concerned about risks to adjacent buildings.

    MGM Resorts is currently in litigation, separate from the stability issues, with Perini Corp., the builders of Harmon Tower.

    Read the full story…

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

    NTSB Cites Design Errors in Fatal Bridge Collapse

    November 28, 2018 —
    Design errors may have played a role in the collapse of the 174-foot-long bridge span that was under construction at Florida International University, according to a Nov. 15 investigative update from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The structure, which was being constructed over live traffic along SW 8th Street, killed six when it suffered a sudden, catastrophic collapse on March 15. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, ENR
    Mr. Judy may be contacted at judys@enr.com

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    September 20, 2017 —
    The New Jersey Law Journal reported that New Jersey Supreme Court “justices reversed an Appellate Division ruling that found three suits filed against contractors by the Palisades at Fort Lee Condominium Association on various dates in March and April 2009 and September 2010 were within the six-year limit because the association received notice of construction defects in the building in an engineer's report issued in June 2007.” The justices stated that the statute of limitations is not reset when property changes hands: "An owner of a building cannot convey greater property rights to a purchaser than the owner possessed. If the building's owner knew or reasonably should have known of construction defects at the time of the sale of the property, the purchaser takes title subject to the original owner's right—and any limitation on that right—to file a claim against the architect and contractors." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor's Agreement to Perform Does Not Preclude Coverage Under Contractual Liability Exclusion

    January 31, 2014 —
    In a much anticipated decision, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that a general contractor who agrees to perform its work in a good and workmanlike manner does not "assume liability" for damages arising out of its defective work so as to trigger the Contractual Liability Exclusion. Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014). Ewing signed an agreement with the School District to serve as general contractor to renovate and build additions to a school, including tennis courts. After construction was completed, the tennis courts started flaking, crumbling, and cracking. The School District filed suit, alleging breach of contract and negligence. 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