BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witness
    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


    Construction Client Advisory: The Power of the Bonded Stop Notice Extends to Expended Construction Funds

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    When to use Arbitration to Resolve Construction Disputes

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    David A. Frenznick Awarded Multiple Accolades in the 2020 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    Georgia Local Government Drainage Liability: Nuisance and Trespass

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Effective July 1, 2022, Contractors Will be Liable for their Subcontractor’s Failure to Pay its Employees’ Wages and Benefits

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

    New Proposed Regulations Expand CFIUS Jurisdiction Regarding Real Estate

    Court Finds Duty To Defend Environmental Claim, But Defense Limited to $100,000

    Implied Warranties for Infrastructure in Florida Construction Defect Claims

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 3- The Last Straw

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    Motions to Dismiss, Limitations of Liability, and More

    Too Costly to Be Fair: Texas Appellate Court Finds the Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Unenforceable

    See the Stories That Drew the Most Readers to ENR.com in 2023

    Relief Bill's Highway Funds Could Help Construction Projects

    COVID-19 Vaccine Considerations for Employers in the Construction Industry

    Illinois Attorney General Warns of Home Repair Scams

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Supreme Court Finds Insurance Coverage for Intentional (and Despicable) Act of Contractor’s Employee

    No Choice between Homeowner Protection and Bankrupt Developers?

    No Damages for Delay May Not Be Enforceable in Virginia

    Barratt Said to Suspend Staff as Contract Probe Continues

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Shimmick Gets Nod for Second Pilot Pile at Settling Millennium Tower

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    First-Time Buyers Home Sales Stagnates

    It’s Time to Start Planning for Implementation of OSHA’s Silica Rule

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Court Rules that Collapse Coverage for Damage Caused “Only By” Specified Perils Violates Efficient Proximate Cause Rule and is Unenforceable

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    Negligent Construction an Occurrence Says Ninth Circuit

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    2019 California Construction Law Update

    McGraw Hill to Sell off Construction-Data Unit

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    Message from the Chair: Kelsey Funes (Volume I)

    Corps Proposes $4.6B Plan to Steel Miami for Storm Surge

    Insurance Policy’s “No Voluntary Payment” Clauses Lose Some Bite in Colorado
    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

    Quick Note: Charting Your Contractual Rights With Respect To The Coronavirus

    April 06, 2020 —
    As more and more information is being learned, and more and more industries are being impacted, it is likely that the construction industry will follow suit. And, while impacts with the global supply chain may not yet be realized, impacts could begin with labor supply and, frankly, employers’ safety protocols dealing with the coronavirus. One suggestion that should be implemented is a detailed chart, similar to the below, where you are charting rights and obligations under your contracts dealing with force majeure, notice, and project suspensions. This is step one to make sure you are making prudent decisions, preserving rights, and making sure contractual obligations are being met. Be proactive, not reactive. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Court of Appeals Issues Decision Regarding Second-Tier Subcontractors and Pre-Lien Notice

    February 06, 2023 —
    Velazquez Framing, LLC (“Velazquez”) v. Cascadia Homes, Inc. (“Cascadia”) is a Court of Appeals, Division 2 case where the primary issue on appeal was whether a second tier subcontractor was required to provide pre-lien notice under RCW 60.04 for its labor. The defendant, Cascadia, was the general contractor that planned to build a home on property it owned in Lakewood, Washington.[1] High End Construction, LLC (“High End”), submitted a bid to Cascadia for framing work on the home. High End began work on Cascadia’s home, but later subcontracted with Velazquez to complete the framing work.[2] Velazquez did not submit a prelien notice for its work on Cascadia’s home, and Cascadia claimed it was unaware that High End subcontracted with Velazquez for framing at the project. High End invoiced Cascadia and was paid for its work, but High End never paid Velazquez. Subsequently, Velazquez recorded a lien for both labor and materials, and later filed a complaint to foreclose its lien. Cascadia, due to the fact Velazquez did not provide it with prelien notice, moved for summary judgment, arguing prelien notice was required under RCW 60.04.031(1)[3] and the labor portion of a lien cannot be segregated where a subcontractor’s lien includes both labor and materials. Velazquez argued that no prelien notice was required under RCW 60.04.021[4] and RCW 60.04.031 and claimed that subcontractors can segregate the labor portion from the materials portion. The trial court granted Cascadia’s motion and ruled Velazquez did not fall within one of the exceptions for prelien notice in RCW 60.04.031(2), and therefore, could not enforce the lien. Velazquez appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Travis Colburn, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Mr. Colburn may be contacted at travis.colburn@acslawyers.com

    Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs

    June 06, 2022 —
    The Florida Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that the homeowner policy's sub-limit for water damage included tear-out costs. Sec. First Ins. Co. v. Vazquez, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1205 (Fla. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2022). A discharge of water from the cast iron pipes caused damage to the home. The water escaped as a result of the failed cast iron pipes due to wear and tear, deterioration, and corrosion. The insurer acknowledged coverage for the water damage and paid $10,000 under the Limited Water Damage Endorsement (LWD Endorsement). The provision recited that "'[t]he limit of liability for all damage to covered property provided by this endorsement is $10,000 per loss." The insureds' suit argued they were entitled to additional benefits for the cost to tear out and replace a part of the concrete slab - an action necessary to reach the corroded pipes. The parties stipulated that the cost of the tear-out would be $40,000. The parties agreed that the LWD Endorsement provided coverage of both water damage and tear-out costs. They also agreed that the cost to repair and/or replace the corroded pipes was not covered. They disagreed, however, over the proper interpretation of the limitation of liability provision in the LWD Endorsement. The insured argued that the $10,000 limit applied to both water damage and tear-out costs. The insureds argued that the $10,00 limit applied only to water damage to covered property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Building Inspector Refuses to State Why Apartments Condemned

    August 06, 2014 —
    In Lockport, New York, “more than two dozen tenants have been locked out of their apartment building…but they have yet to find out why,” according to WIVB news. Brian Belson, Lockport’s building inspector, condemned the building and ordered the tenants to leave, providing only 15 minutes advanced warning. Once all of the tenants were out, the first floor windows and doors were boarded up. At first, tenants were told that they would be able to return in a few days, but now they are being told it could be weeks. However, WIVB News reported that Brian Belson has not returned any of their phone calls, so they have “filed a Freedom of Information request at Town Hall, seeking that information.” Belson has five days to respond to the request. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Foundation Differences Across the U.S.

    October 15, 2014 —
    The National Association of Home Builders’ Eye on Housing analyzed data from the Survey of Construction (SOC) to demonstrate the differences in foundations built across the nation. For instance, “about 30 percent of new single-family homes started in 2013 have a full or partial basement, 54 percent are built on slabs, and 15 percent have a crawl space. The remaining share, including homes built on stilts or pilings, accounted for about 1 percent of homes started in 2013.” Climate is the deciding factor in what type of foundations are used, Eye on Housing reported. “In colder regions where codes require foundations to be deep the marginal cost of providing a full or partial basement is not that great. So basements are the most common type of foundation in the colder climate divisions.” The warm climate area of the West South Central division are primarily built on slabs. However, “the other two divisions that make up the South region – the East South Central and South Atlantic –are still largely built on slabs but crawl spaces are also common.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    March 12, 2015 —
    The New York Times reported that “[t]here is growing concern that some developers are repeating the mistakes of the last housing boom and delivering substandard product.” “My phone is ringing already on projects that were just completed,” Steven D. Sladkus, a Manhattan real estate lawyer who says his firm has dozens of active construction defect cases, told the New York Times. “Uh-oh, here we go again.” Recent data shows a rising trend of building plans in New York: “Last year, the city issued construction permits for 20,300 units of housing, according to the Real Estate Board of New York. And the state attorney general’s office received submissions for 263 offering plans for condo conversions and new construction in 2014, up from 184 in 2011. Those numbers will most likely grow in 2015, encouraged by Mayor Bill de Blasio’s push to build more housing.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Top Five Legal Mistakes in Construction

    April 04, 2022 —
    Many contractors repeatedly make the same mistakes in negotiating contracts. Here are the most common mistakes contractors make—and how they can be avoided. 1. Not Being Careful With Force Majeure Clauses To protect themselves from liability in the event of unforeseen circumstances like fires, floods, wars, unusual delays in deliveries, strikes, pandemics or acts of God, contractors should ensure their contracts contain robust force majeure provisions. These provisions state that in the event of any extenuating circumstances outside of its control, the contractor is not liable for any damages that result from a delay to the project completion date and is entitled to a time extension. This clause has been critical in addressing COVID-19-related disruptions and the current material shortages. Contractors should be wary, however, of “no damage-for-delay” language, which often appears in conjunction with these clauses. Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan A. Cass, Nicholas F. Morello and John A. Greenhall, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Cass may be contacted at jcass@cohenseglias.com Mr. Greenhall may be contacted at jgreenhall@cohenseglias.com Mr. Morello may be contacted at nmorello@cohenseglias.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    March 05, 2015 —
    According to the New Jersey Law Journal, an asbestos case involving “a long-time ship worker who died of mesothelioma was reinstated by a New Jersey appellate court on March 3.” A lower court judge had “dismissed the claims against them based on his view that the evidence presented by the plaintiff was insufficient to show that the ships on which he worked contained asbestos and that he was exposed to it.” However, the appeals judges disagreed. “Although the summary judgment motion was decided on a very narrow ground, we conclude that the record as a whole establishes a triable issue as to whether plaintiff was exposed to asbestos or asbestos-containing products on defendant’s dredges,” judges Susan Maven and Henry Carroll stated, according to the New Jersey Law Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of