• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia landscaping construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia institutional building Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia industrial building Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia Subterranean parking Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia condominium Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia custom homes Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia custom home Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia office building Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia tract home Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia high-rise construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia hospital construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia condominiums Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia multi family housing Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia housing Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia casino resort Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia townhome construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia mid-rise construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia structural steel construction Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia production housing Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia Medical building Building Consultant Ashburn Virginia
    Ashburn Virginia testifying construction expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction defect expert witnessAshburn Virginia construction project management expert witnessAshburn Virginia expert witness windowsAshburn Virginia engineering expert witnessAshburn Virginia defective construction expertAshburn Virginia OSHA expert witness construction
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant Builders Information
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Virginia Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (HB558; H 150; §55-70.1) Warranty extension applicable to single-family but not HOAs: in addition to any other express or implied warranties; It requires registered or certified mail notice to "vendor" stating nature of claim; reasonable time not to exceed six months to "cure the defect".

    Building Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Ashburn Virginia

    A contractor's license is required for all trades. Separate boards license plumbing, electrical, HVAC, gas fitting, and asbestos trades.

    Building Consultant Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Northern Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4840
    3901 Centerview Dr Suite E
    Chantilly, VA 20151

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    The Top of Virginia Builders Association
    Local # 4883
    1182 Martinsburg Pike
    Winchester, VA 22603

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Shenandoah Valley Builders Association
    Local # 4848
    PO Box 1286
    Harrisonburg, VA 22803

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Piedmont Virginia Building Industry Association
    Local # 4890
    PO Box 897
    Culpeper, VA 22701

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Fredericksburg Area Builders Association
    Local # 4830
    3006 Lafayette Blvd
    Fredericksburg, VA 22408

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Augusta Home Builders Association Inc
    Local # 4804
    PO Box 36
    Waynesboro, VA 22980

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
    Local # 4809
    PO Box 7743
    Charlottesville, VA 22906

    Ashburn Virginia Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Ashburn Virginia

    Contract Change #8: Direct Communications between Owners and Contractors (law note)

    South Carolina School District Investigated by IRS and FBI

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt

    Hammer & Hand’s Top Ten Predictions for US High Performance Building in 2014

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    Canada Housing Starts Increase on Multiple-Unit Projects

    Brief Discussion of Enforceability of Anti-Indemnity Statutes in California

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Is the Sky Actually Falling (on Green Building)?

    Policy Sublimit Does Not Apply to Business Interruption Loss

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    Insurance Telematics and Usage Based Insurance Products

    Broker Not Liable for Failure to Reveal Insurer's Insolvency After Policy Issued

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    Concrete Worker Wins Lawsuit and Settles with Other Defendant

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Appeals Court Explains Punitive Damages Awards For Extreme Reprehensibility Or Unusually Small, Hard-To-Detect Or Hard-To-Measure Compensatory Damages

    Wendel Rosen Attorneys Named as Fellows of the Construction Lawyers Society of America

    Is Ohio’s Buckeye Lake Dam Safe?

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Apartment Construction Increasing in Colorado while Condo Construction Remains Slow

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    Attorneys Fees Under California’s Prompt Payment Statutes. Contractor’s “Win” Fails the Sniff Test

    Construction Project Bankruptcy Law

    CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

    ZLien Startup has Discovered a Billion in Payments for Clients

    Did the Court of Appeals Just Raise the Bar for California Contractors to Self-Report Construction-Related Judgments?

    Cuomo Proposes $1.7 Billion Property-Tax Break for New York

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Pinnacle Controls in Verano

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    Senate Committee Approves Military Construction Funds

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    #6 CDJ Topic: Construction Defect Legislative Developments

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    No Additional Insured Coverage Under Umbrella Policy

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    Study Finds Mansion Tax Reduced Sales in New York and New Jersey

    Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance

    BHA Sponsors the 9th Annual Construction Law Institute

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    New Green Standards; Same Green Warnings for Architects & Engineers (law note)
    Corporate Profile


    The Ashburn, Virginia Building Consultant Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Consultant News & Info
    Ashburn, Virginia

    Wisconsin Court Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusion in E&O Policy

    July 21, 2018 —
    In its recent decision in Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co. v. GHD Inc.,2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111827 (E.D. Wisc. July 5, 2018), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin had occasion to consider the application of a breach of contract exclusion in a professional liability policy. Crum’s insured, DVO, was sued in connection with its contract to construct a biogas converter mechanism. The underlying suit alleged a sole cause of action; namely, breach of contract based on DVO’s failure to have fulfilled its obligations to design the mechanism to specification. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP

    Exculpatory Provisions in Business Contracts

    May 30, 2018 —
    An exculpatory provision in a contract is a provision that relieves one party from liability for damages. It shifts the risk of an issue entirely to the other party. Such a provision is generally drafted by the party preparing the contract that is looking to eliminate or disclaim liability associated with a particular risk, oftentimes a risk within their control. These provisions are also known as limitation of liability provisions because they do exactly that — limit liability as to a risk. For this reason, they can be useful provisions based on the context of certain risks, and are provisions that are included in business contracts (such as construction contracts). While such clauses are disfavored, they are enforceable if they are drafted clearly, unambiguously, and unequivocally. If they are unclear, ambiguous, or equivocal, they will construed against enforcement. See Obsessions In Time, Inc. v. Jewelry Exchange Venture, LLP, 43 Fla.L.Weekly D1033a (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (finding exculpatory clause in lease ambiguous and, therefore, unenforceable as to lessor looking to benefit from the exculpatory clause). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    September 25, 2018 —
    In Woodrum v. Ga. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 815 S.E.2d 650 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018), the Court of Appeals of Georgia considered whether the lower court properly disqualified a contractor as an expert witness and excluded the contractor from offering lay opinion testimony regarding the value of a property. The Court of Appeals held that, while the lower court properly disqualified the contractor as an expert witness, it improperly excluded the general contractor’s lay opinion testimony regarding the value of the property. This case establishes that, in Georgia, a lay witness can provide opinion testimony on the value of a property if the proponent of the testimony demonstrates that the witness had an opportunity to form a reasoned opinion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at

    Beam Cracks Cause Closure of San Francisco’s New $2B Transit Center

    October 09, 2018 —
    After two billion dollars and two decades, San Francisco’s newest transportation hub opened on August 11th of this year only to be closed a month later, on September 25th, after a cracked beam was discovered, according to The Real Deal. Later, workers found an additional, though smaller, crack in another beam parallel to the first. The Real Deal described the crack in the first beam: “The Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) – which built and now operates the center – said the tear was 2.5 feet long and 4.5 inches deep on a 60-foot beam that holds a 5.4-acre rooftop park above a bus deck.” Steel supports are now being installed to reduce the pressure on the beams. While officials have not discovered the cause of the problem, The Real Deal reported several possibilities, including “fabrication problems, installation error, too much weight, or an issue in the initial design.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Speeding up Infrastructure Projects with the Cloud

    July 28, 2018 —
    Infrakit, a cloud service developed by a Finnish startup company, is accelerating infrastructure projects both in Finland and, increasingly, abroad. Automatic transfer of information among parties involved in a project saves time, reduces paperwork, and facilitates the work of land surveyors. In addition to excavators, rock drills can now also be viewed on the map. The CEO and founder of DSC Finland, the supplier of Infrakit, is Teemu Kivimäki. He states that despite the name of the company changing over the years, its principles have stayed the same. Kivimäki describes the functions of the service: “The digital site plans are added to Infrakit, and they can then be viewed on a map and in a 3D view with a browser. When the working machines are also linked to the service, the user can see if the work has been executed according to plan.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    August 20, 2018 —
    Earlier this summer, in Gables & Villas at River Oaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Castlewood Builders LLC, 2018 UT 28, the Supreme Court of Utah addressed the question of whether the plaintiff’s construction defects claims against the general contractor for a construction project were timely-filed, or barred by the statute of repose. In Utah, the statute of repose requires that an action be “commenced within six years of the date of completion.” The plaintiff alleged that its 2014 amended complaint naming the general contractor as a defendant was timely-commenced because, before the date on which Utah’s statute of repose ran, a defendant filed a motion to amend its third-party complaint to name the general contractor as a defendant, and the defendant subsequently assigned its claims to the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that the filing of its 2014 amended complaint related back[1] to the date of its original complaint. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that an action is “commenced” by filing a complaint and that a motion for leave to amend does not count as “commencing” an action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at

    No Bond, No Recovery: WA Contractors Must Comply With WA Statutory Requirements Or Risk Being Barred From Recovery If Their Client Refuses To Pay

    September 18, 2018 —
    The risk that a contractor’s client may refuse to pay the full contract balance is a day-to-day reality for every contractor. That risk – and the stress it causes in the mind of any contractor – is tempered by the knowledge that Washington statutes provide contractors with ready access to the courts to file a lawsuit and be fully compensated for the work performed. But a recent case provides a grim reminder that the same statutes that giveth court access can also taketh away. Washington’s Contractor Registration Act (“WCRA”)[1] requires every contractor engaging or offering to engage in services in Washington to register with the Department of Labor and Industries (”L&I”). In order to sue to collect compensation for work or to enforce a contract, a contractor must prove that he/she “was a duly registered contractor and held a current and valid certificate of registration at the time he or she contracted for the performance of such work or entered into such contract.”[2] In order to conclude that a contractor has substantially comply with these requirements, a court must find that: (1) The department has on file the information required by RCW 18.27.030; (2) the contractor has at all times had in force a current bond or other security as required by RCW 18.27.040; and (3) the contractor has at all times had in force current insurance as required by RCW 18.27.050.[3] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joshua Lane, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Lane may be contacted at

    Human Eye Resolution Virtual Reality for AEC

    July 02, 2018 —
    Virtual reality opens new perspectives for communication and customer involvement in construction. Sweco, Varjo, and Teatime Research are together exploring the possibilities of VR using state-of-the-art technology. “I think that the use of VR in construction is still at a visionary stage and useful practical applications are rare,” says Niina Jaatinen, Service Manager at Sweco. “When we learned about Varjo’s exceptional technology, we thought that maybe it’s now time to start developing the really useful apps customers would yearn for.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at