BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts contractor expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts ada design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts building expertCambridge Massachusetts forensic architectCambridge Massachusetts multi family design expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Lead Paint: The EPA’s Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule

    Design Professional Liens: A Blueprint

    Background Owner of Property Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate Construction Defects

    Do You Have A Florida’s Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act Claim

    Construction Robots 2023

    Wildfire Is Efficient Proximate Cause of Moisture Reaching Expansive Soils Under Residence

    Jarred Reed Named to the National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List for Second Consecutive Year

    Hilti Partners with Canvas, a Construction Robotics Company

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    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

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    Litigation Privilege Saves the Day for Mechanic’s Liens

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    Caution to GCs! An Exception to Privette Can Leave You Open to Liability

    Resilience: Transforming the Energy Sector – Navigating Land Issues in Solar and Storage Projects | Episode 3 (11.14.24)

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    2023 Construction Law Update

    Wildfire Threats Make Utilities Uninsurable in US West

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    New Jersey Traffic Circle to be Eliminated after 12 Years of Discussion

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Traub Lieberman Partner Adam Joffe Named to 2022 Emerging Lawyers List

    California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of anti-SLAPP Motion in Dispute Over Construction of Church Facilities

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Remodel Leaves Guitarist’s Home Leaky and Moldy

    New Orleans Is Auctioning Off Vacant Lots Online

    Incorrect Information Provided on Insurance Application Defeats Claim for Coverage

    New Home Permits Surge in Wisconsin

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Pre-Answer Motion to Dismiss in Favor of Defendant

    Is Equipment Installed as Part of Building Renovations a “Product” or “Construction”?

    Third Circuit Holds That Duty to Indemnify "Follows" Duty to Defend

    Record-Setting Construction in Fargo

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claim

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

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

    Persimmon Offers to Fix Risky Homes as Cladding Crisis Grows

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers®

    Still Going, After All This Time: the Sacketts, EPA and the Clean Water Act

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

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    From ‘Cuckoo’s Egg’ to Today’s Cyber Threat Landscape

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

    Performing Work with a Suspended CSLB License Costs Big: Subcontractor Faces $18,000,000 Disgorgement

    Chinese Brooklyn-to-Los Angeles Plans Surge: Real Estate

    Blog: Congress Strikes a Blow to President Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation
    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. Drawing 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

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

    September 14, 2020 —
    In a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case, CK Revocable Trust v. My Home Group Real Estate LLC, 2020 WL 4306183 (7/28/2020), the Court of Appeals addressed the distinction between “substantive” and “technical” statutory requirements for real estate broker commission agreements. The Court explained that failure to comply with a substantive requirement would preclude the broker from recovering a commission, but failure to comply with a technical requirement would not. As examples of such substantive requirements, the Court identified the statutory requirement that the broker be licensed at the time the claim for commission arose, and the statutory requirement that the listing agreement be signed by both the broker and the client. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    January 23, 2013 —
    A Colorado State Senator has introduced a bill suggesting a change to the way that construction defect claims are handled in "transit-oriented developments." And what are these? According to the bill these are "any multi-family residential or mixed-use project within one-half mile of any commuter rail stop, commuter light rail stop, or commuter bus stop." So the bill would treat homes with good public transportation differently from those not so convenient to public transportation. The bill, SB 52, would institute a right to repair for construction defects in these developments. Construction defect claims would be referred to binding arbitration. Further, construction professionals could not be sued for environmental conditions related to transit, commercial, public, or retail use. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    November 04, 2019 —
    California’s highest court held yesterday in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., that the state’s insurance notice-prejudice rule is a “fundamental public policy” for the purpose of choice of law analyses. This unanimous ruling, issued in response to certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, confirms and emphasizes California’s common law rule that policyholders who provide “late notice” may proceed with their insurance claim, absent a showing by the insurer of substantial prejudice. The California Supreme Court also extended the prejudice requirement, holding that a first-party insurer must show that it was prejudiced before denying coverage under a policy’s “consent provision,” which typically provides that the policyholder must obtain the insurer’s “consent” before incurring costs and expenses. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lorelie S. Masters, Michael S. Levine and Michelle M. Spatz Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    April 06, 2016 —
    We’ve written before about why the date of “completion” on a California construction project is important, and why, if I may be blunt, determining that date can be as frustrating as a one-legged man in a game of kickass. You see, in California the deadline to record a mechanics lien, serve a stop payment notice, or make a payment bond claim – important construction payment remedies the California State Legislature saw fit to help you get paid – often depends on when a project is “completed.” So, for example, the deadline for direct contractors to record a mechanics lien is 90 days from completion of the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/30/22) – Proptech Trends, Green Construction, and Sustainable Buildings

    December 13, 2022 —
    This week’s round-up explores 4 key trends expected to impact proptech in 2023, global investment in green construction technologies, sustainable buildings and their perceived value for tenants in Europe, and more.
    • Sitting at the crossroads between real estate and technology, proptech has experienced significant growth, which is expected to accelerate via 4 key trends in 2023. (Zain Jaffer, Forbes)
    • Global investment in green construction technologies reached $2.2 billion in 2022, with legislation and technological innovation serving as the key driving forces behind this growth. (Jennifer Kite-Powell, Forbes)
    • In Europe, sustainable buildings have increased the asset values for commercial real estate managers, with tenants willing to pay more for efficient buildings. (David Worford, Environment + Energy Leader)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    February 28, 2018 —
    Changes in contracts and rules could make the sector a lot more efficient. The question of whether to prioritize jobs or economic efficiency is always difficult. Nowhere is this more of a dilemma than in the construction industry. In a world of rapid technological disruption, construction is a rock of solidity to which many blue-collar workers can cling. The industry still employs about 7 million workers in the U.S. The job doesn’t change that much from decade to decade. It’s a big broad occupation, unlike social-media marketing or other new niche jobs, so it allows working-class people to minimize the time and effort they spend building for a career. And workers get trained on the job, without years of college. What’s more, construction workers are mostly male. To the degree this is a result of sexism, that’s bad. But it also means that the construction industry employs lots of men, at a time when they haven’t been doing so well in the jobs department. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Noah Smith, Bloomberg

    Shifting Fees and Costs in Nevada Construction Defect Cases

    November 26, 2014 —
    In Nevada, homeowners who sue a builder for residential constructional defects may recover attorneys’ fees and costs caused by the defect. Many times, the request for attorneys’ fees can outpace the size of the actual claim for defects. However, Nevada provides builders with two ways to potentially shift the right to recover attorneys’ fees and costs away from the homeowner and to the builder. The first arises during the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 40 process (Nevada’s Right to Repair law). After a builder receives notice of construction defects, it is required to provide the claimant with a written response to each defect, which may include a proposal for monetary compensation (including contribution from a subcontractor, supplier, or design professional). See NRS 40.6472. If a claimant unreasonably rejects a reasonable written offer of settlement included in the response and decides to commence litigation, the court may deny the claimant’s attorneys’ fees and costs and award attorneys’ fees and costs to the builder. See NRS 40.650. Thus, by including a reasonable offer of monetary compensation in a Chapter 40 response, a builder could possibly avoid paying any fees and costs and even recover its own fees in defending against the claim. A second method for shifting fees and costs is through a written offer of judgment (OOJ). See NRS 17.115 and NRCP 68. Not limited solely to construction defect matters, an OOJ is a useful tool in all kinds of litigation. OOJs are designed to facilitate and encourage pre-trial settlement by incentivizing parties to make reasonable settlement offers that—when unreasonably rejected—have the consequence of shifting the right to recover attorneys’ fees. Basically, when a party rejects an OOJ and fails to obtain a more favorable judgment, the court cannot award any attorneys’ fees and costs to the rejecting party and may award attorneys’ fees incurred from the date of the offer to the entry of judgment, as well as all reasonable costs, to the party who made the offer. In a recent decision, the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed that when a homeowner rejects an OOJ and fails to obtain a more favorable judgment, it can wipe out that homeowner’s right to Chapter 40 fees and costs. See Gunderson, et al. v. D.R. Horton, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 9 (Feb. 27, 2014). In other words, “While NRS Chapter 40 permits an award of reasonable attorney fees proximately caused by a construction defect, it does not guarantee it.” Id. Because of the potentially harsh consequences of rejecting an OOJ, there are specific requirements that must be met to trigger them. An offer of judgment must be made in writing, can be made at any time at least 10 days before trial, and is irrevocable for 10 days with no provision for withdrawal before the 10 days expire. See Nava v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 118 Nev. 396, 46 P.3d 60 (2002). A party may make successive offers of judgment, but the most recent offer extinguishes previous offers and is controlling for determining the date from which attorneys’ fees may be awarded. See Albios v. Horizon Communities, Inc. 132 P.3d 1022 (2006). In Beattie v. Thomas, 99 Nev. 579, 668 P.2d 268, 274 (1983), the Nevada Supreme Court explained that the purpose of OOJs are not to cause plaintiffs to unfairly forego legitimate claims. However, when a valid offer of judgment is made, the offer is rejected, and the party rejecting the offer fails to obtain a more favorable judgment, a court must evaluate whether the plaintiff's claim was brought in good faith; whether the offer of judgment was reasonable and in good faith in both its timing and amount; whether the plaintiff's decision to reject the offer and proceed to trial was grossly unreasonable or in bad faith; and whether the fees sought by the offer are reasonable and justified. “After weighing the foregoing factors, the district judge may, where warranted, award up to the full amount of fees requested.” Id. It is worth noting that in Albios v. Horizon Communities, Inc. 132 P.3d 1022 (2006), the Nevada Supreme Court held that when a party rejects a reasonable OOJ and is foreclosed from recovering fees and costs, the party is likewise foreclosed from an award of fees and costs under Chapter 40. This means that even if a builder fails to include a monetary settlement offer as part of a Chapter 40 response, it may still avoid paying the claimant’s fees and costs with a reasonable and timely OOJ. Finally, it is important to remember that OOJs are a powerful tool that can cut both ways. If an OOJ is not reasonable and timely, or if it fails to contemplate all the potential recovery of an offeree, the OOJ may have no effect on the outcome of a case. Moreover, if a party rejects an OOJ and fails to obtain a more favorable judgment, that party could end up paying the offeror’s costs and attorney’s fees incurred from the date of the offer. Given this powerful impact, OOJs should be an integral part of pre-litigation planning and overall litigation strategy. About the Author Casey J. Quinn is an associate in the Las Vegas office of Newmeyer & Dillion LLP. His practice focuses on complex commercial, construction, and insurance litigation and appellate work. Casey can be reached by email at Casey.Quinn@ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    May 06, 2024 —
    The contractor's project manager asked for money due, $735,000 under Payment Application 13, to be sent by the owner electronically. "Hi Rick," the project manager, whose first name is Jalen, wrote in an email dated Aug. 15. "Can we have payments remitted electronically as we currently have numerous uncleared checks on hold?" Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of