BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts retail construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts landscaping construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts fenestration expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts stucco expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts hospital construction expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts structural engineering expert witnessesCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness consultant
    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


    Construction Defects as Occurrences, Better Decided in Law than in Courts

    Mandatory Arbitration Isn’t All Bad, if. . .

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Building Safety Month Just Around the Corner

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    Florida Law: Interplay of SIR and the Made-Whole Doctrine

    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    A Contractual Liability Exclusion Doesn't Preclude Insurer's Duty to Indemnify

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Florida trigger

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Top 10 Construction Contract Provisions – Changes and Claims

    Steps to Curb Construction Defect Actions for Homebuilders

    Study Finds San Francisco Bay is Sinking Faster than Expected

    English v. RKK. . . The Saga Continues

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    Michigan Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade, Improving from "D+" Grade in 2018

    Contractor Succeeds At the Supreme Court Against Public Owner – Obtaining Fee Award and Determination The City Acted In Bad Faith

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    Construction Law Client Alert: California’s Right to Repair Act (SB 800) Takes Another Hit, Then Fights Back

    Miller Act Payment Bond Surety Bound to Arbitration Award

    Duty to Defend Requires Payments Under Policy's Supplemental Payments Provision

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Small Airport to Grow with Tower

    Defenses Raised Three-Years Too Late Estop Insurer’s Coverage Denial

    What Rich Millennials Want in a Luxury Home: 20,000 Square Feet

    SCOTUS to Weigh Landowners' Damage Claim Against Texas DOT

    Finding Plaintiff Intentionally Spoliated Evidence, the Northern District of Indiana Imposes Sanction

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers – Two Recognized as Rising Stars

    The Heat Is On

    Asbestos Confirmed After New York City Steam Pipe Blast

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    False Implied Certifications in Making Payment Requests: What We Can Learn from Lance Armstrong

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Consequential Damages From Subcontractor's Faulty Work Constitutes "Property Damage" and An "Occurrence"

    Federal Court Opinion Has Huge Impact on the Construction Industry

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    U.S. Homeowners Are Lingering Longer, and the Wait Is Paying Off

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    Jet Crash Blamed on Runway Construction Defect

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    After 15 Years, Settlement Arrested at San Francisco's Millennium Tower

    More In-Depth Details on the Davis-Bacon Act Overhaul
    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

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    July 22, 2019 —
    The repair of two fractured girders spanning Fremont Street and the reinforcement of twin girders spanning First Street are complete at the beleaguered Salesforce Transit Center in San Francisco. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    May 17, 2021 —
    The New York State Assembly is considering A07285, which creates a private right of action for bad faith “if the insurer unreasonably refuses to pay or unreasonably delays payment without substantial justification.” The bill was first introduced in 2013 but was reintroduced on May 3, 2021 and has received some recent attention. According to the bill, an insurer acts unreasonably when it (among other things):
    1. Fails to provide the claimant with accurate information regarding policy provisions relating to the coverage at issue; or
    2. Fails to effectuate in good faith a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of a claim or portion of a claim and where the insurer failed to reasonably accord at least equal or more favorable consideration to its insured's interests as it did to its own interests, and thereby exposed the insured to a judgment in excess of the policy limits or caused other damage to a claimant; or
    3. Fails to provide a timely written denial of a claimant's claim, or portion thereof, with a full and complete explanation of such denial, including references to specific policy provisions wherever possible; or
    Reprinted courtesy of Copernicus T. Gaza, Traub Lieberman, Adam Krauss, Traub Lieberman, Robert S. Nobel, Traub Lieberman, Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman and Eric D. Suben, Traub Lieberman Mr. Gaza may be contacted at cgaza@tlsslaw.com Mr. Krauss may be contacted at akrauss@tlsslaw.com Mr. Nobel may be contacted at rnobel@tlsslaw.com Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com Mr Suben may be contacted at esuben@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    April 25, 2022 —
    In United States Automatic Sprinkler Corp. v. Erie Ins. Exch., et al., No. 21A-CT-580, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 87 (Automatic Sprinkler), the Court of Appeals of Indiana (Court of Appeals) considered whether there is a privity requirement for property damage claims against contractors. The court imposed a privity requirement. The court also addressed whether a subrogation waiver in a contract with a tenant applied to damage caused by work done outside the contract, at the landlord’s request. The court held that the waiver did not apply. In this case, United States Automatic Sprinkler (Automatic Sprinkler) contracted with a tenant (Contract Tenant) to inspect and test a sprinkler system at a commercial building in Indiana. The contract included a waiver of subrogation provision. The building landlord subsequently hired Automatic Sprinkler to repair a leak in the sprinkler system. After completing the repairs, the system failed and flooded the building, causing significant property damage to several tenancies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Kenney, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Kenney may be contacted at kenneyme@whiteandwilliams.com

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    June 09, 2016 —
    California’s one-action rule provides that “[t]here can be but one form of action for the recovery of any debt or the enforcement of any right secured by mortgage upon real property or an estate for years therein . . . .” Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 726(a). In other words, the one-action rule prescribes that the only process for recovery of a debt secured by a mortgage or deed of trust is to foreclose on the lien. The rule aims to prevent a multiplicity of actions and vexatious litigation, and to force a beneficiary to look to all of the security as the primary fund for payment of a debt before looking to the trustor’s other assets. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony J. Carucci, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Carucci may be contacted at acarucci@swlaw.com

    Shoring of Ceiling Does Not Constitute Collapse Under Policy's Definition

    November 12, 2019 —
    Despite the need to shore up the ceiling, the building was not in a state of collapse under the language of the policy. Ravinia Vouge Cleaners v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123594 (N.D. Ill. July 24, 2019). Ravinia Cleaners held a property policy issued by Travelers for the building from which it operated its dry-cleaning business. On February 2, 2015, there was heavy snowfall. On February 4, Ravinia reported to Travelers a leak coming from the ceiling. A temporary "shoring " was placed on the ceiling. Ravinia reported to Travelers that there was damage to the roof on February 25, 2015. Travelers hired an engineer who observed a buckling truss and roof displacing downward. The inspector recommended that the building be vacated and not occupied until adequate shoring was in place. Travelers denied coverage because the building was in a state of imminent collapse which was caused by the weight of ice and snow, and defective construction of the truss system. The policy excluded damage relating to a "collapse of a building." Collapse was defined by the policy as "an abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or any part of a building," such that the building could not be occupied for its intended purpose. There were exceptions to the exclusion, however, if the cause of the collapse was: (1) weight of snow; or (2) use of defective materials or methods in construction if the collapse occurred after construction. The policy also excluded damage from a building being in a state of imminent collapse unless the damage was caused by: (1) weight of snow; or (2) use of defective materials or methods in construction if the collapse occurred during construction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Western Specialty Contractors Branches in San Francisco and Cleveland Take Home Top Industry Honors

    January 03, 2022 —
    (St. Louis, MO, Dec. 21, 2021) Western Specialty Contractors Branches in San Francisco, CA and Cleveland, OH are ending the year's fourth quarter on a high note, with each receiving a top industry award. In October, Western's San Francisco Branch was named a 2021 International Concrete Repair Institute (ICRI) Project of the Year Award Finalist (Historic Category) for renovation and repurposing of the SMUD Museum of Science and Curiosity in Sacramento, CA. Western's Cleveland Branch was honored in December with the Institute of Real Estate Management (IREM) Northern Ohio Chapter's Industry Partner of the Year Award. About Western Specialty Contractors Family-owned and operated for more than 100 years, Western Specialty Contractors is the nation's largest specialty contractor in masonry and concrete restoration, waterproofing and specialty roofing. Western offers a nationwide network of expertise that building owners, engineers, architects, and property managers can count on to develop cost-effective, corrective measures that can add years of useful life to a variety of structures including industrial, commercial, healthcare, historic, educational and government buildings, parking structures, and sports stadiums. Western is headquartered in St. Louis, MO with 30 branch offices nationwide and employs more than 1,200 salaried and hourly professionals who offer the best, time-tested techniques and innovative technology. For more information about Western Specialty Contractors, visit www.westernspecialtycontractors.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    December 21, 2016 —
    The general contractor, an additional insured on the subcontractor's policy, was not entitled to coverage for construction defect claims that arose after completion of the project. Weitz Co. v. Acuity, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150433 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 31, 2016). Weitz was the general contractor hired by Twin Lakes for construction of a residential community. One of the subcontractors, Miter Masonry, was insured by Acuity under a CGL policy. Work on the project began in 2002 and was substantially completed in 2005. In 2011, Twin Lakes notified Weitz that there were moisture infiltration issues at the project that may be related to work during the project. Twin Lakes filed a Demand for Arbitration against Weitz on November 30, 2012. Twin Lakes alleged that the defects included the building wrap, windows, doors, wood trim, aluminum wrap, vinyl siding, flashing and brick veneer not being installed in accordance with contract documents and/or industry standards. The arbitration panel awarded damages to Twin Lakes in the amount of $2,775,771.86. The panel found that Weitz breached sections of the contract which caused moisture intrusion and damage to all the units. The panel ultimately held that Weitz could recover from the subcontractors 100% of the $2,775,771.86 awarded. Acuity's insured, Miter Masonry, was determined to be 4% at fault for the damages. 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

    Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage for Injury To Subcontractor's Employee

    April 28, 2014 —
    The Third Circuit reversed the district court and held that the additional insured was covered for injury to the subcontractor's employee despite an employee's exclusion in the policy. ArcelorMittal Plate, LLC v. Joule Technical Serv, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2905 (3d Cir. Feb. 18, 2014). ArcelorMittal Plate, LLC (AMP) owned a steel production facility. AMP contracted with Joule, an industrial staffing and engineering firm, for regular performance of maintenance and repair work at its plant. Joule was obligated to provide a CGL policy adding AMP as an additional insured "for all claims including, but not limited to, claims by Joule's employees." Joule added AMP as an additional insured to its policy with Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. The policy had an "employee exclusion" which stated, “This insurance does not apply to bodily injury to (1) an employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of (a) employment by the insured or (b) performing duties related to the conduct of the insured's business.” 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