Most building problems get settled with a phone call. The contractor comes back, the insurer pays the claim, the owner and the tenant work it out. Sometimes they do not. When the people involved disagree about why something cracked, sagged, leaked or failed, and money depends on the answer, a structural engineer is often brought in to give an independent opinion. When that opinion may be used in a dispute, the engineer is serving as an expert witness.
This is a plain-language look at what that role involves, when it tends to come up, and what helps the engineer do the job well.
What an expert witness structural engineer does
An expert witness is someone with specialized training who is asked to explain technical facts to people who do not have that training — attorneys, insurance representatives, mediators, arbitrators, and sometimes a judge or jury. In a building dispute, the questions are usually structural ones:
- What actually caused the damage?
- Was the structure designed and built the way the drawings and the building code called for?
- Was the damage there before a certain date, or did it start after?
- Is what happened consistent with a storm, an impact, an overload, or long-term movement?
- What does a proper repair need to include?
The engineer’s job is to answer those questions from the evidence, explain the reasoning in writing, and be able to walk through that reasoning clearly if asked. The job is not to argue anyone’s side. An engineering opinion only carries weight if it follows the evidence, regardless of who retained the engineer.
When a dispute needs a structural engineer
Not every disagreement about a building needs an engineer. These are the situations where one is commonly brought in:
- Construction defect disputes. An owner believes something was built wrong. A contractor believes it was built to the drawings. Someone has to compare what is in the field against what was designed and what the code requires.
- Contested insurance claims. The owner and the carrier disagree about the cause or extent of structural damage — for example, whether roof damage came from a snow event or from years of gradual deterioration. There is more on the claim side in our article on hiring your own structural engineer for an insurance claim.
- Impact damage. A forklift, crane or vehicle strikes a building, and the parties disagree about what was damaged and what the repair should be.
- Overload questions. A floor, mezzanine or roof was loaded beyond what it was designed for, and the question is who knew and when.
- Property transactions. A buyer discovers a structural problem after closing and the question becomes whether it existed, and was visible, beforehand.
- Landlord and tenant disagreements over who is responsible for structural damage in a leased space.
Curva Consultants works with building owners, insurance carriers, contractors and attorneys. The principal engineer is available for expert witness engagements involving structural damage, failures and construction disputes, including litigation support.
Consulting first, testifying only if needed
Many engineering engagements in a dispute start as consulting work. An attorney or owner asks the engineer to look at the damage, review the documents, and explain what happened — privately, before anyone decides how to proceed. Sometimes that review shows one side’s position is weak and the matter settles. Sometimes it shows the question is closer than anyone thought.
Only some of these engagements ever reach a stage where the engineer’s opinion is formally presented. How the engineer is retained, and in what role, is a decision for the attorney handling the matter. It shapes what gets written down and when, so it is worth settling at the start.
How the investigation works
The engineering side of a dispute follows the same basic path as any forensic engineering investigation:
- Document review. Drawings, specifications, permit records, inspection reports, change orders, photos, repair invoices, and any earlier engineering reports.
- Site observation. A visit to see the conditions first-hand, measure, photograph, and note anything the documents do not show.
- Analysis. Checking what the structure was designed to carry against what it was actually asked to carry — and comparing the damage pattern to the causes being argued about. Different causes leave different patterns.
- A written report. The findings, the reasoning, and the opinion, laid out so someone without an engineering background can follow it.
A good report separates what was observed from what was concluded, and says plainly where the evidence is limited. That candor is part of what makes an opinion credible.
What to do before the engineer arrives
The most useful evidence is often lost in the first few weeks, before anyone realizes the matter will be contested. If a dispute looks likely:
- Photograph everything as it is now, with dates, from wide shots down to close-ups. Only do this from areas that are safe to be in.
- Keep failed or removed components — a cracked beam, a sheared connector, a section of damaged decking — rather than hauling them away with the debris.
- Talk to your attorney and your insurer before permanent repairs. Temporary shoring or weather protection is often necessary for safety, but covering up or replacing damaged structure can remove the evidence everyone will later need to see.
- Gather the paperwork: drawings, contracts, permits, inspection records, and any correspondence about the problem.
If you are unsure whether a damaged structure is safe to be near, keep people out and have it evaluated first. Safety comes before documentation.
Structural disputes in northeast Wisconsin
The climate here shapes what gets argued about. Heavy snow and drifting — especially where a lower roof sits against a taller wall — puts real demand on roof framing, and the question after a failure is often whether the roof was designed for the load it saw. Repeated freeze-thaw cycles work on masonry, concrete and foundations over time, which can make it hard to tell sudden damage from gradual wear. Clay soils and a high spring water table in parts of the region contribute to foundation movement that can look alarming but may or may not be structural. Our article on when a foundation crack is cosmetic versus a structural problem covers that distinction, and dead load versus live load explains the loads a structure is designed around.
Telling these causes apart is exactly the kind of question an independent engineering review exists to answer.
Credentials that matter
An engineering opinion is only as useful as the qualifications behind it. The principal engineer at Curva Consultants holds Wisconsin PE License No. 47224 and a Master of Science in Civil (Structural) Engineering from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Those credentials are listed on the forensic engineering page.
Working with Curva Consultants
Curva Consultants provides forensic structural investigation, insurance claim support and expert witness services across northeast Wisconsin, alongside structural design for residential, commercial, industrial and municipal projects. Offices are in Green Bay and Manitowoc, serving downtown Green Bay, Green Bay East, Manitowoc, De Pere, Ashwaubenon, Allouez, Howard, Suamico, the Appleton area and the Sheboygan area.
If the question starts with an existing building rather than a dispute, see what to expect from a structural engineer inspection.
To discuss an expert witness or investigation engagement, get in touch or call 866-455-0155. A full list of services is on the structural engineering services page.