BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building expert
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Connecticut Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Fairfield Connecticut

    License required for electrical and plumbing trades. No state license for general contracting, however, must register with the State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Home Builders & Remo Assn of Fairfield Co
    Local # 0780
    433 Meadow St
    Fairfield, CT 06824

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Eastern Connecticut
    Local # 0740
    20 Hartford Rd Suite 18
    Salem, CT 06420

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of New Haven Co
    Local # 0720
    2189 Silas Deane Highway
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Hartford Cty Inc
    Local # 0755
    2189 Silas Deane Hwy
    Rocky Hill, CT 06067

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of NW Connecticut
    Local # 0710
    110 Brook St
    Torrington, CT 06790

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Connecticut (State)
    Local # 0700
    3 Regency Dr Ste 204
    Bloomfield, CT 06002

    Fairfield Connecticut Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Fairfield Connecticut


    Techniques for Resolving Construction Disputes

    Determining Occurrence for Injury Under Commercial General Liability Policy Without Applying “Trigger Theory”

    What Does It Mean When a House Sells for $50 Million?

    White and Williams LLP Acquires 6 Attorney Firm

    A Reminder to Get Your Contractor’s License in Virginia

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    OSHA Set to Tag More Firms as Severe Violators Under New Criteria

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    Governor Brown Signs Legislation Aimed at Curbing ADA Accessibility Abuses in California

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    Melissa Dewey Brumback Invited Into Claims & Litigation Management Alliance Membership

    Contract Not So Clear in South Carolina Construction Defect Case

    Hurricane Claim Cannot Survive Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    California Contractors: Amended Section 7141.5 Provides Important License Renewal Safety Net

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    Singer Ordered to Deposition in Construction Defect Case

    A Court-Side Seat: Permit Shields, Hurricane Harvey and the Decriminalization of “Incidental Taking”

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Have Nearly Finished Technical Work

    California Superior Court Overrules Insurer's Demurrer on COVID-19 Claim

    City of Seattle Temporarily Shuts Down Public Works to Enforce Health and Safety Plans

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    Be Careful When Requiring Fitness for Duty Examinations

    Property Owner’s Defense Goes Up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Ten ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Future Army Corps Rulings on Streams and Wetlands: Changes and Delays Ahead

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    Damage to Plaintiffs' Home Caused By Unmoored Boats Survives Surface Water Exclusion

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Annual Meeting in Vancouver

    District Court's Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

    Request for Stay Denied in Dispute Over Coverage for Volcano Damage

    Northern District of Mississippi Finds That Non-Work Property Damages Are Not Subject to AIA’s Waiver of Subrogation Clause

    Arizona – New Discovery Rules

    Construction Delayed by Discovery of Bones

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    Short-Term Rental Legislation & Litigation On the Way!

    Yet ANOTHER Reason not to Contract without a License

    Mortgage Whistleblower Stands Alone as U.S. Won’t Join Lawsuit

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    No Occurrence Found for Damage to Home Caused by Settling

    Risk Transfer: The Souffle of Construction Litigation

    A Call to Washington: Online Permitting Saves Money and the Environment

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Insurers’ Bid to Overturn a $400M Decision

    Update Regarding McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct.
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

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

    Flooded Courtroom May be Due to Construction Defect

    September 01, 2011 —

    The General Services Administration wouldn’t pin it on a construction defect, but a spokesperson said that a pipe that was misaligned during installation was the likely cause of a flood in the Thomas F. Eagleton US Courthouse on August 23. According to the St. Louis Dispatch, the burst pipe caused a 17-story waterfall in the courthouse, soaking ceilings and floors, and drenching the building’s contents.

    The building was dedicated eleven years ago. During the nearly ten years before the building was complete, there were construction disputes and soil contamination issues.

    Read the full story…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    November 04, 2019 —
    The Federal Miller Act is a great tool that subcontractors and suppliers on Federal projects can use for collection of wrongfully withheld amounts due. However, as a recent federal case from the Eastern District of Virginia points out, the construction contract’s terms affect when a subcontractor or supplier can use this great collection tool and how much it can recover. In Aarow v Travelers the Court looked at the interaction between a typical termination clause, a “pay when paid” clause, and the Miller Act. The key facts are these. The general contractor on the project at issue, Syska, did not get paid some disputed amounts by the owner and subsequently did not pay Aarow, the plaintiff and a subcontractor on the project. Aarow then refused to continue work and was terminated by Syska who then took over the completion of the work. Aarow sued, seeking damages for the value of its work prior to the termination. Travellers, the surety defended stating that, if Aarow was properly terminated for cause by Syska, then Aarow was not entitled to payment under the contract until such time as the work was completed and accepted by the owner. The termination clauses are set out in the linked opinion. The Court agreed with Travelers, stating that the pay when paid clause created a situation whereby Aarow could not stop work merely because of a non-payment by Syska attributed to non-payment by the owner. The Court was clear in stating that the Miller Act trumps “pay when paid” in instances where the only cause for non-payment is non-payment by an owner. The Court then reasoned that it is the interaction between the termination and “pay when paid” provisions, and not the “pay when paid” clause itself, that exonerated Travelers because it created the default by Aarow due to its refusal to continue work. In short, Aarow was properly terminated for cause because it left the job without justification and therefore Travelers was not liable. 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

    Affordable Harlem Housing Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    July 09, 2014 —
    A family in Harlem, New York has demanded that Abyssinian Development Corporation pay $250,000 to fix the construction defects in their newly-purchased townhouse, according to The Daily News. Allegedly, “[i]nterior walls, bamboo-tiled floors and windowsills began to crack shortly after they moved in, and an improperly installed gas boiler system” stopped working, while “rain has caused cellar walls to deteriorate.” The townhouse is part of the “Harlem Village Homes II initiative that offers affordable houses in Harlem to those making below $130,000.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    June 07, 2021 —
    Recently, ransomware has taken to the forefront in national news. The most prevalent ransomware attack, the one perpetrated against Colonial Pipeline by the now-defunct "Dark Side" hackers, has served to remind businesses about the risks of ransomware. What happened to Colonial Pipeline? What should businesses do to learn from Colonial Pipeline's response? What should a business avoid? What happened to Colonial Pipeline? Colonial Pipeline, a Georgia based operator of fuel pipelines, had its billing software compromised by Dark Side's ransomware attack.1 Following this, Colonial Pipeline took proactive measures to (1) shut down their systems; (2) evaluate the issue; and (3) safely brought systems back on line after ensuring that they were not compromised. Following this, Colonial Pipeline did eventually pay the 4.4 million dollar ransom demand from Dark Side. What it got in return was a decryption key, as promised, which ended up being slower than Colonial Pipeline's own backups.2 The ultimate result of this event being an initial cost of $4.4 million, in addition to lost profits, additional security costs, reputational costs, and litigation costs as consumers had filed a class-action lawsuit to hold Colonial Pipeline accountable for their perceived lapse in security.3 Further, the fall-out from Colonial Pipeline had prompted additional cybersecurity efforts and changes by the Biden administration, including proposed regulations requiring pipeline companies to inform the Department of Homeland Security of cybersecurity incidents within 12 hours, in addition to keeping a cybersecurity coordinator on staff at all times, and reviews of current security measures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of J. Kyle Janecek, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Janecek may be contacted at kyle.janecek@ndlf.com

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    February 12, 2013 —
    Colorado State Senator Mark Scheffel has removed Senate Bill 13-052 from the Senate Judiciary Committee’s calendar because he feels an upcoming study on construction near transit centers will be important for the consideration of the bill. SB 13-052 would affect construction defect claims in communities that were within a half mile of public transportation. Critics claim it would gut construction defect protections, as even a bus stop would count as a “mass transit center.” Scheffel says he doesn’t know what the study will find, but says that whether he likes or hates it, it will be relevant. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Adopts Less Stringent Summary Judgment Standard

    January 25, 2021 —
    On New Year’s Eve, Florida’s Supreme Court issued an amendment to essentially apply the federal summary judgment standard to cases in Florida state courts starting on May 1, 2021. See In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, No. SC20 1490 (Fla. Dec. 31, 2020) (per curiam). This change brings Florida in line with the majority of states (38). Summary judgment is easier to obtain under the federal standard. A moving party need only show that the opposing party lacks the evidence to support its case at trial. Under the soon-to-be obsolete Florida standard, however, moving parties had to entirely “disprove the nonmovant’s theory of the case in order to eliminate any issue of fact." See id. at 3. The nonmoving party could defeat a summary judgment motion by showing that there was a slight doubt on any material fact. See id. at 4-5. This change is good news for defendants and their insurers. With summary judgment easier to obtain, weak claims can be defended prior to trial. Claims may be resolved more quickly and economically. The threat of summary judgment also gives defendants powerful leverage in settlement discussions. The shift may also reduce the backlog of cases accumulated during the suspension of jury trials over the past summer. Reprinted courtesy of John A. Rine, Lewis Brisbois and Sarah Hock, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Rine may be contacted at John.Rine@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Hock may be contacted at Sarah.Hock@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Diggerland, UK’s Construction Equipment Theme Park, is coming to the U.S.

    January 22, 2014 —
    This summer, Sahara Sam’s Oasis, located in West Berlin, New Jersey, will open Diggerland Adventure Park, a new 14-acre construction equipment themed amusement park, according to Equipment World. The United Kingdom currently has Diggerlands in four locations: “There, the parks use primarily JCB backhoes, excavators, and skid steers in a variety of ways.” Machines are used as rides, including “Spindizzy, in which an excavator takes a bucket full of people on a 360 degree spin.” Diggerland is currently owned by Allsafety Ltd. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Appeals Court Says Loss of Use Is “Property Damage” Under Liability Policy, and Damages Can be Measured by Diminished Value

    December 11, 2018 —
    In a win for policyholders, a California appellate court has held that the loss of use of property resulting from alleged negligence constitutes property damage under a liability insurance policy. In Thee Sombrero, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, the property owner, Thee Sombrero, operated a venue as a nightclub. After a shooting inside the nightclub caused a patron’s death, the local government revoked Sombrero’s right to use the property as a nightclub and, instead, limited permissible use of the property to a banquet hall. Sombrero sued the security company it had hired to keep guns out of the club, alleging that it was the security company’s negligence that caused the city to revoke Sombrero’s nightclub use permit and that the loss of use of the facility as a nightclub resulted in damages of almost a million dollars based on an assessment of the property’s diminished market value. The security company did not contest the claim, and Sombrero obtained a default judgment. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and David M. Costello, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Costello may be contacted at dcostello@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of