BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Columbus Ohio townhome construction building expert Columbus Ohio condominium building expert Columbus Ohio custom homes building expert Columbus Ohio hospital construction building expert Columbus Ohio production housing building expert Columbus Ohio Medical building building expert Columbus Ohio mid-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio institutional building building expert Columbus Ohio tract home building expert Columbus Ohio structural steel construction building expert Columbus Ohio casino resort building expert Columbus Ohio housing building expert Columbus Ohio concrete tilt-up building expert Columbus Ohio low-income housing building expert Columbus Ohio landscaping construction building expert Columbus Ohio retail construction building expert Columbus Ohio high-rise construction building expert Columbus Ohio office building building expert Columbus Ohio parking structure building expert Columbus Ohio Subterranean parking building expert Columbus Ohio industrial building building expert Columbus Ohio
    Columbus Ohio construction code expert witnessColumbus Ohio building code compliance expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio stucco expert witnessColumbus Ohio hospital construction expert witnessColumbus Ohio construction expert witness consultantColumbus Ohio forensic architect
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Columbus, Ohio

    Ohio Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: According to HB 175, Chptr 1312, for a homebuilder to qualify for right to repair protection, the contractor must notify consumers (in writing) of NOR laws at the time of sale; The law stipulates written notice of defects required itemizing and describing and including documentation prepared by inspector. A contractor has 21 days to respond in writing.


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Columbus Ohio

    Licensing is done at the local level. Licenses required for plumbing, electrical, HVAC, heating, and hydronics trades.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Buckeye Valley Building Industry Association
    Local # 3654
    12 W Main St
    Newark, OH 43055

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Building Industry Association of Central Ohio
    Local # 3627
    495 Executive Campus Drive
    Westerville, OH 43082

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Miami County
    Local # 3682
    1200 Archer Dr
    Troy, OH 45373

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Ohio Home Builders Association (State)
    Local # 3600
    17 S High Street Ste 700
    Columbus, OH 43215

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Union County Chapter
    Local # 3684
    PO Box 525
    Marysville, OH 43040

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Clark County Chapter
    Local # 3673
    PO Box 1047
    Springfield, OH 45501

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10

    Shelby County Builders Association
    Local # 3670
    PO Box 534
    Sidney, OH 45365

    Columbus Ohio Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Columbus Ohio


    Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020: Yet Another Reason to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    New 2021 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Effective February 23, 2021

    A Recession Is Coming, But the Housing Market Won't Trigger It

    A Look Back at the Ollies

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Special Events

    Avoiding Lender Liability for Credit-Related Actions in California

    Designed to Expose: Beware Lender Certificates

    Is it the End of the Story for Redevelopment in California?

    TV Kitchen Remodelers Sued for Shoddy Work

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: World Class Shopping Experiences

    How the Pandemic Pushed the Construction Industry Five Years Into the Future

    Court Holds That Self-Insured Retentions Exhaust Vertically And Awards Insured Mandatory Prejudgment Interest in Stringfellow Site Coverage Dispute

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    Sellers of South Florida Mansion Failed to Disclose Construction Defects

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    2015-2016 California Labor & Employment Laws Affecting Construction Industry

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    How to Lose Your Contractor’s License in 90 Days (or Less): California and Louisiana

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    Policy Language Matters: New Jersey Court Bars Cleanup Coverage Under Broad Policy Terms

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You May Want an Intervention …”

    CC&Rs Not the Place for Arbitration Agreement, Court Rules

    "Multiple Claims" Provisions on Contractor's Professional Liability Policy Creates a Trap for Policyholders

    Palm Beach Billionaires’ Fix for Sinking Megamansions: Build Bigger

    Coverage Denied Where Occurrence Takes Place Outside Coverage Territory

    Alert: AAA Construction Industry Rules Update

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Asbestos Client Alert: Court’s Exclusive Gatekeeper Role May not be Ignored or Shifted to a Jury

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Can General Contractors Make Subcontractors Pay for OSHA Violations?

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Group Ranked in National Tier 1 by US News & World Report

    Ensuring Arbitration in Construction Defect Claims

    Hundreds of Snakes Discovered in Santa Ana Home

    Bel Air Mansion Construction Draws Community Backlash

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel

    The Other Side of the North Dakota Oil Boom: Evictions

    The Four Forces That Will Take on Concrete and Make Construction Smart

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation
    Corporate Profile

    COLUMBUS OHIO BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Columbus, Ohio 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 Columbus' 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
    Columbus, Ohio

    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    March 30, 2016 —
    Burdman Law Group, a boutique civil litigation law firm with offices in California, Nevada, and Arizona, is pleased to announce that Pieter M. O’Leary, was named a Partner in January 2016. Mr. O’Leary is an experienced litigator who has represented individuals and businesses in both state and federal court in actions involving breach of contract, negligence, construction, fraud, product defect, and business torts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    June 11, 2014 —
    The federal district court determined the excess carrier's declaratory judgment action to establish it had no coverage obligations should be stayed while the underlying case was still pending. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Ortiz & Assocs., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64286 (D. Ore. May 9, 2014). The subcontractor's employee was killed on the job site when struck by a dump truck owned by the general contractor, Inland Asphalt Co. Island was sued for wrongful death. Island was an additional insured under the subcontractor's primary policy and excess policy with Scottsdale. Inland put Scottsdale on notice of the underlying wrongful death lawsuit, but did not tender its defense to Scottsdale. 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

    Oregon Codifies Tall Wood Buildings

    October 23, 2018 —
    Oregon is the first state to allow wood buildings to exceed six stories without special consideration under the Oregon Building Codes Division’s recent statement of alternative method (SAM), which provides prescriptive path elements for mass timber construction. The SAM establishes three new types of construction—Type IV A, B and C—that allow buildings to go as high as nine to 18 stories with varying percentages of exposed timber surfaces and sprinkler system requirements. Reprinted courtesy of Joanna Masterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    October 12, 2020 —
    Aside from waiver of lien rights (something that will be illegal in Virginia after July 1, 2015), the most troublesome contractual impediment to payment for a subcontractor or supplier on a project often is the “pay if paid” clause. As a general rule, in Virginia, these clauses where drafted in the proper fashion, are enforceable. As I have said many times, in Virginia freedom of contract almost always wins out. While this is the case, I emphasize that such clauses must be very explicit and specific. Furthermore, and in something that should be obvious, these clauses are generally limited by the Courts of Virginia to only be enforceable and to only forgive the need for payment if the upstream contractor on the construction job has not been paid for the work that the sub claiming non payment has done. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    University of Tennessee’s New Humanities Building Construction Set to Begin

    January 14, 2015 —
    Construction preparation of the Tennessee Volunteer’s $30.5 million new humanities building has begun, according to The Tennessean. The 80,000 square-foot facility will become the largest building on the university’s campus, and will feature 23 classrooms, 18 labs, 11 collaborative study areas, 56 offices, 20 adjunct faculty workrooms as well as an outdoor theater and courtyard. “This is a significant milestone in the history of the college,” President Jerry Faulkner told The Tennessean. “This building has been on our wish list for about 12 years in terms of wanting to have this facility available, so for the first time our humanities division is going to have a home of its own.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Leonard Fadeeff v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    September 21, 2020 —
    In Fadeeff v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 50 Cal.App.5th 94 (May 22, 2020), the California Court of Appeal reversed the entry of summary judgment in favor of State Farm General Insurance Company (“State Farm”) in connection with a smoke and soot damage claim made by Leonard and Patricia Fadeeff (the “Fadeeffs”) for damage sustained by their home due to the 2015 Valley Fire. The parties’ dispute arose out of the Valley Fire, which took place in Lake County, California. The Fadeeffs’ home was located in Hidden Valley Lake. The Fadeeffs submitted a claim to State Farm under their homeowners policy. Initially, after an adjuster inspected the home and noted that it was “well maintained” with no apparent maintenance issues, State Farm made a series of payments and arranged for ServPro to clean the smoke and soot damage. Subsequently, the Fadeeffs retained an independent adjuster and submitted a supplemental claim in the amount of $75,000. State Farm retained a different unlicensed adjuster to investigate the claim and retained expert, Forensic Analytical Consulting Services (FACS) to inspect the Fadeeffs’ home, and another company referred to as HVACi, to inspect the Fadeeffs’ HVAC system. The independent adjuster used to investigate the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim failed to follow company guidelines in connection with using experts, which required specific questions to be addressed by the expert. In addition, FACS only took surface samples of the walls in the Fadeeffs’ home. Ultimately, the reports prepared by FACS and HVACi concluded that no additional work was required to remediate the damage sustained by the Fadeeffs’ home. Thereafter, State Farm denied the Fadeeffs’ supplemental claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    September 21, 2020 —
    In our previous alert, we discussed the Federal Government’s Ban (the “Ban”) on certain Chinese covered telecommunications and video surveillance equipment and services in federal government contracts. The ban prohibits government contractors and subcontractors from supplying to the Federal Government or using in their own internal operations certain telecommunications or video surveillance equipment or services produced by Huawei Technologies Company, ZTE Corporation, Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, and Dahua Technology Company, as well as their subsidiaries and affiliates. The Ban currently applies to companies contracting directly with the Federal Government. Soon, however, the Ban – at least in part – will expand to contractors and subcontractors who are awarded certain federally assisted contracts and subcontracts. On August 13, 2020, the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) published Final Guidance revising its grants and agreements regulations (2 CFR Part 200) to prohibit recipients and subrecipients from using loan or grant funds to purchase or obtain covered telecommunications and video surveillance equipment or services. Effective November 12, 2020, recipients and subrecipients are prohibited from obligating or expending loan or grant funds to:
    1. Procure or obtain;
    2. Extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain; or
    3. Enter into a contract (or extend or renew a contract) to procure or obtain equipment, services, or systems that use covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system.
    Reprinted courtesy of Lori Ann Lange, Peckar & Abramson and Sabah Petrov, Peckar & Abramson Ms. Lange may be contacted at llange@pecklaw.com Ms. Petrov may be contacted at spetrov@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    McDermott International and BP Team Arbitrate $535M LNG Site Dispute

    April 02, 2024 —
    BP and Kosmos Energy are seeking “maximum recoverable damages” of about $535 million in binding arbitration with contractor McDermott International over a claim that it failed to meet contract obligations on subsea pipeline installation for an estimated $4.8 billion liquefied natural gas project off Africa. Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of