BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    concrete tilt-up building expert Cushing Texas landscaping construction building expert Cushing Texas multi family housing building expert Cushing Texas townhome construction building expert Cushing Texas production housing building expert Cushing Texas industrial building building expert Cushing Texas institutional building building expert Cushing Texas housing building expert Cushing Texas custom home building expert Cushing Texas low-income housing building expert Cushing Texas high-rise construction building expert Cushing Texas retail construction building expert Cushing Texas condominiums building expert Cushing Texas office building building expert Cushing Texas Subterranean parking building expert Cushing Texas parking structure building expert Cushing Texas tract home building expert Cushing Texas hospital construction building expert Cushing Texas condominium building expert Cushing Texas mid-rise construction building expert Cushing Texas structural steel construction building expert Cushing Texas casino resort building expert Cushing Texas
    Cushing Texas construction expert witnessCushing Texas expert witnesses fenestrationCushing Texas structural engineering expert witnessesCushing Texas architectural engineering expert witnessCushing Texas construction expert witnessesCushing Texas roofing construction expertCushing Texas expert witness concrete failure
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Cushing, Texas

    Texas Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: HB 730 amended the Texas Property Code by adding Title 16 and amending chapter 27. Overseen by the Texas Residential Construction Commission (TRCC) the code asserts that a contractor is not liable for any percentage of damages caused by failure to take reasonable action to mitigate damages or take reasonable action to maintain the residence. It also limits damages, requires written notification and response for right of repair and defines warranty periods. Additionally, SB 754 states“(5-10 Sec. 27.107) a contractor may assert as an affirmative defense to an allegation of a defect made in a complaint filed under this subchapter that the defect is the result of abuse, neglect, or unauthorized modifications or alterations of the home.”


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cushing Texas

    No state license is required, however, general contractors must get permits at the local level. Separate boards license HVAC, and plumbing trades.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    El Paso Assn of Bldrs
    Local # 4527
    6046 Surety Dr
    El Paso, TX 79905

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Forest Country Chapter
    Local # 4555
    PO Box 630983
    Nacogdoches, TX 75963
    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Heart of Texas Builders Association
    Local # 4575
    PO Box 20697
    Waco, TX 76702

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Permian Basin Home Builders Association
    Local # 4540
    4305 N Garfield St Ste 224
    Midland, TX 79705

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of San Angelo
    Local # 4557
    4172 South Jackson
    San Angelo, TX 76903

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Deep East Texas Association of Builders
    Local # 4548
    PO Box 153337
    Lufkin, TX 75915

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10

    Tyler Area Builders Association
    Local # 4569
    1504 West Grande Blvd St A
    Tyler, TX 75703

    Cushing Texas Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Cushing Texas


    Performance Bonds: Follow the Letter of the Bond and Keep The Surety Informed

    Sacramento’s Commercial Construction Market Heats Up

    A New AAA Study Confirms that Arbitration is Faster to Resolution Than Court – And the Difference Can be Assessed Monetarily

    What Is the Best Way to Avoid Rezoning Disputes?

    Steel-Fiber Concrete Link Beams Perform Well in Tests

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    Accounting for Payments on Projects Became Even More Crucial This Year

    A Court-Side Seat: Environmental Developments on the Ninth Circuit

    Carin Ramirez and David McLain recognized among the Best Lawyers in America© for 2021

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    In Construction Your Contract May Not Always Preclude a Negligence Claim

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    Pulte’s Kitchen Innovation Throw Down

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience

    From Singapore to Rio Green Buildings Keep Tropical Tenants Cool

    Housing-Related Spending Makes Up Significant Portion of GDP

    Acquisition, Development, and Construction Lending Conditions Ease

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    Topic 606: A Retrospective Review of Revenue from Contracts with Customers

    Subsidence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Damage Caused by Landslide

    Plehat Brings Natural Environments into Design Tools

    Reminder About the Upcoming Mechanic’s Lien Form Change

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    Construction Defect Headaches Can Be Avoided

    How to Remove a Mechanics Lien from Your Property

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Construction Law: Unexpected, Fascinating, Bizarre

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Time to Repair Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws?

    43% of U.S. Homes in High Natural Disaster Risk Areas

    ASCE Statement on House Failure to Pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Retainage on Pennsylvania Public Contracts

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Nevada HOA Criminal Investigation Moving Slowly

    Hawaii Court Finds No Bad Faith, But Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Survives Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Action

    Eighth Circuit Affirms Finding of Bad Faith, Award of Costs and Prejudgment Interest

    CAUTION: Terms of CCP Section 998 Offers to Compromise Must Be Fully Contained in the Offer Itself

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    East Coast Evaluates Damage After Fast-Moving 'Bomb Cyclone'

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    “But I didn’t know what I was signing….”

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    Phillips & Jordan Awarded $176M Everglades Restoration Contract

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages
    Corporate Profile

    CUSHING TEXAS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Cushing, Texas Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Cushing'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
    Cushing, Texas

    Construction Law Client Advisory: What The Recent Beacon Decision Means For Developers And General Contractors

    August 20, 2014 —
    On July 3, 2014, the California Supreme Court (the “Court”) came out with its decision in Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, et al. The Beacon decision settled a long-standing dispute in California about whether design professionals such as architects and engineers owe a duty to non-client third parties. In finding that the plaintiffs in Beacon could state a claim against the architects of the Beacon project, the Court also sowed the seeds of change in the way contracts are structured between developers, architects, engineers, and even general contractors. So, how will Beacon change the landscape for developers and general contractors? It is important to understand the factual background in Beacon to predict how the decision may alter the playing field. For a detailed analysis of the Amicus briefs in the Beacon matter from the AIA, the CBIA, and the Consumer Attorneys of California, please click here. The Beacon case arose from a common development model in California: a developer conceives a multi-unit project, maps the project as a condo development but rents as apartments. Shortly after completion of the Beacon project, the developer sold the entire project and the new owner finalized the existing condominium map and placed the units on the market as condominiums. Although the architects always knew they had designed a residential structure, the project ultimately became a condominium development. The newly formed homeowners’ association filed a construction defect suit against the developers, general contractor, the subcontractors and the architects for design and construction defects. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Whitney L. Stefko, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com; Ms. Stefko may be contacted at wstefko@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    March 19, 2014 —
    The California Supreme Court surprised everyone on December 11, 2013 when it denied Brookfield Homes’ request for review of the ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC (2014) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which was decided by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District Division Three (Orange County). In that case the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act aka SB800 is not the exclusive remedy for a homeowner seeking damages for construction defects that have resulted in property damage. Under the ruling, homeowners may choose to sue builders under common law theories of liability such as strict liability and negligence, in addition to liability under the Act. This ruling made homeowners' compliance with the prelitigation requirements of the Act optional and thereby put builders' “right to repair” in jeopardy. The ruling undermined the expectations of California's homebuilders who, for the past decade, understood that their liability is limited by the Act and that they have a right to repair. Since the Liberty Mutual case was handed down, the topic has become a hotbed item with several divisions of the Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Three (Los Angeles County) issued a ruling against Premier Homes in the case of Burch v. Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 159 that, without independent analysis, simply adopted the holding in the Liberty Mutual case. But on February 21, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Four (Los Angeles County) ruled in the case of KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v.Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 167 that a homeowner's failure to give the builder an opportunity to inspect and repair a construction defect excused the builder's liability under the Act. Additionally, the Court of Appeal went out of its way to state it had ruled earlier in that case that the Act is the exclusive remedy. The various rulings lay a foundation for ultimate intervention by the California Supreme Court. In the meantime, these opposing cases will be cited by counsel for homeowners and builders alike for opposing positions as they continue to navigate construction defect disputes. Mr. Byassee is a strategic litigator specializing in representation of builders and developers. For more information regarding dispute resolution procedures under SB800, Mr. Byassee may be contacted at (949) 250-9797 or by email at dbyassee@ut-law.com. Published courtesy of David J. Byassee, Ulich & Terry LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Home Sellers Have Duty to Disclose Construction Defect Lawsuits

    October 21, 2013 —
    If you’re selling a home in California that has been the subject of a construction defect lawsuit, you probably have to disclose this, according to Steven G. Lee, an attorney at Reid & Hellyer. Mr. Lee notes that California law mandates the disclosure of “any lawsuits by or against the Seller threatening to or affecting the Property, including any lawsuits alleging a defect or deficiency.” He further notes that “for those selling units in a condominium or townhouse development, this includes defects in the common areas.” He notes that failure to disclose will not invalidate the sale, but the seller may be “liable for actual damages suffered by the buyer.” Merely disclosing the former defect may not be enough. Mr. Lee notes that the California Court of Appeals ruled in one case that although buyers had been informed of past water intrusion, knowledge of the construction defect lawsuit may have affected the buyer’s decision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Supreme Court to Rehear Menchaca Bad Faith Case

    January 10, 2018 —
    On December 15th, the Texas Supreme Court agreed to revisit its April 7, 2017 decision in USAA Texas Lloyds Co. v. Menchaca, No. 14-0721, a “bad faith” case arising out of Hurricane Ike damage, in which the court held that a policyholder could potentially recover policy benefits for statutory bad faith under Texas law, even though a jury concluded that the insurer did not breach the terms of the policy, if the policyholder could show that she was nevertheless entitled to the benefit. The decision to rehear this matter comes at the urging of insurers and interested groups, including the Insurance Council of Texas and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who argued that the April 7, 2017 ruling substantially unsettled Texas insurance law. Menchaca is a first-party property insurance coverage case. After Hurricane Ike struck in 2008, plaintiff Menchaca submitted a claim under her homeowners policy to USAA. A USAA adjuster later concluded that Menchaca’s property suffered only “minimal damage” that fell below the deductible. Menchaca sued claiming breach of contract and unfair claims settlement practices in violation of the Texas Insurance Code. As damages, she sought only the policy benefit, court costs, and attorneys’ fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sean P. Mahoney, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Mahoney may be contacted at mahoneys@whiteandwilliams.com

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    November 30, 2020 —
    Force majeure clauses have been standard in contracts dating back hundreds of years in the United States—and even longer in Europe. “Force majeure,” which is French for “greater force,” removes liability for unforeseen events that prevent parties from fulfilling contractual obligations. In a year defined by the COVID-19 pandemic, these clauses have gone from boilerplate basics to something worthy of further examination and attention in order to minimize risk for all parties involved in a construction project. Prior to COVID-19, drafters might have considered a localized or regional event that would lead to invoking a force majeure clause. It is doubtful, however, that anybody envisioned the impact on such a world-wide scale. UNDERSTANDING THE AGREEMENTS Force majeure clauses cover unforeseen events, a broad term that encompasses both acts of God and human-caused incidents. These range from natural disasters like earthquakes and hurricanes to acts of terrorism, strikes, political strife, government actions, war and other difficult- or impossible-to-predict disruptions. When such an event occurs, the force majeure clause attempts to remove, or at least reduce, uncertainty as to the rights and liabilities of the parties to the agreement. Reprinted courtesy of Michael E. Carson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Carson may be contacted at michael.carson@nationwide.com

    Out of Eastern Europe, a Window Into the Post-Pandemic Office

    September 28, 2020 —
    Special quarantine rooms. Floor-to-ceiling walls in bathroom stalls. Touchless entrances that take your temperature. This is what telecommunications company Ericsson’s office building in Bucharest looks like after coronavirus. The space has become the pilot for a 100-prong coronavirus standard that a real estate investor in Eastern Europe is pitching as a new global “immune” building standard. Liviu Tudor, president of the Brussels-based European Property Federation, hopes the standard will convince more employees to go back to work. He’s gathered a team of experts in construction, health care and engineering, such as such as Adrian Streinu-Cercel, the head of Bucharest's biggest infectious diseases hospital, to develop three tiers of “immune” building certifications that he says are intended to make indoor spaces “pandemic proof.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Andra Timu & Irina Vilcu, Bloomberg

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    August 27, 2014 —
    If you live in a major U.S. city and look out over the skyline, chances are good you’ll see construction cranes. Lots of them. Only twice in the past 25 years have new apartment buildings been going up as fast as they are right now. That’s not necessarily a good omen. The first time, in February 2000, was right before the dot-com bubble burst. The second time, January 2006, came right before the housing bubble burst. Now we learn that builders broke ground on 423,000 new multifamily units in July, right before … who knows what? Monthly building data released earlier this week by the Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development showed that new home construction overall posted strong gains in July, with the highest number of new home starts in eight months. The comeback largely manifested in an uptick in apartment buildings with five or more units, which saw an almost 50 percent increase in new starts in July over a year earlier. By comparison, starts on single-family homes were up only about 10 percent over the same period. That’s part of the reason that the Northeast, with its large, dense cities, saw the biggest monthly increase, up 44 percent from June. That matches the analysis by Trulia (TRLA) Chief Economist Jed Kolko, who found that among metro areas, Boston and New York are building more than in the past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen Weise, Bloomberg
    Ms. Weise may be contacted at kweise@bloomberg.net

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    January 03, 2022 —
    Recently, I’ve been on an “advising” kick here at Construction Law Musings. My last two posts have been about communication and trusting your gut when it comes to a smooth construction project. This post will be the third in the trilogy (and who knows maybe I’ll have a 4th and 5th like the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy “trilogy”). While all construction contractors should use their communication skills and instincts to assure a smooth and hopefully profitable project, all of the gut following and great communication will not help you if your contract is not up to snuff. In the spirit of giving you a few basics things to look at, here’s my list of three basics that you need in your contract and a three things to be on the lookout for in others’ contracts. First, the good stuff that needs to be there:
    1. Attorney Fees Clause– without it, a Virginia court (and most other courts) will not award you a judgment for any attorney fees spent to protect your rights.
    2. Dispute Resolution– whether the specified resolution is through the litigation process, ADR or some combination, such a clause or paragraph will only help define the parameters of what happens with a claim.
    3. Detailed scope of work– Without the proper detail in the scope of work, the parties cannot properly set expectations and know what happens when things change.
    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