BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect 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


    Update Relating to SB891 and Bond Claim Waivers

    #10 CDJ Topic: Carithers v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    Dealing with Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    Construction Up in United States

    Ambiguity in Insurance Policy will be Interpreted in Favor of Insurance Coverage

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the 2016 Southern California Super Lawyers Lists

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    Candis Jones Named “On the Rise” by Daily Report's Georgia Law Awards

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolute Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    No Conflict in Successive Representation of a Closely-Held Company and Its Insiders Where Insiders Already Possess Company’s Confidential Information

    Can Your Employee File a Personal Injury Claim if They’re Injured at Work?

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    The Administrative Procedure Act and the Evolution of Environmental Law

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    The California Legislature Return the Power Back to the People by Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Confirms: Construction Defect Claims Not Covered by CGL Policies

    The Comcast Project is Not Likely to Be Shut Down Too Long

    No Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Under Hawaii Law, but All is not Lost for Insured Contractor

    How to Build a Coronavirus Hospital in Ten Days

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    Patti Santelle Honored by Rutgers School of Law with Arthur E. Armitage Sr. Distinguished Alumni Award

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Construction Law Firm Welin, O'Shaughnessy + Scheaf Merging with McDonald Hopkins LLC

    Taylor Morrison v. Terracon and the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Eight-Corners Duty to Defend Issue to Texas Supreme Court

    Insurer Must Indemnify Additional Insured After Settlement

    “Since You Asked. . .”

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Kansas City Airport Terminal Project Faces Delays, Rising Costs

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Will AI Completely Transform Our Use of Computers?

    New Jersey’s Governor Puts Construction Firms on Formal Notice of His Focus on Misclassification of Workers as Independent Contractors

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Preventing Common Electrical Injuries on the Jobsite

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    A Lot of Cheap Housing Is About to Get Very Expensive

    2020s Most Read Construction Law Articles

    Construction Needs Collaborative Planning

    Safe Commercial Asbestos-Removal Practices

    Manhattan Vacancies Rise in Epicenter Shift: Real Estate

    Freight Train Carrying Hot Asphalt, Molten Sulfur Plunges Into Yellowstone River as Bridge Fails

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    The Requirement to State a “Sum Certain” No Longer a Jurisdictional Bar to Government Contract Claims
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    California Contractors: New CSLB Procedure Requires Non-California Corporations to Associate All Officers with Their Contractor’s License

    April 19, 2021 —
    As of July 1, 2020, “[e]very person who is an officer, member, responsible manager, or director of a corporation or limited liability company seeking licensure under this chapter shall be listed on the application as a member of the personnel of record,” and they must match those officers listed on California Secretary of State’s (SOS) records. (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7065 (b)(1)). This is a deviation from the Contractors State License Board’s (CSLB) past practice of requiring foreign corporations to associate as personnel of record only their president, in contrast to requiring domestic corporations to associate their president, secretary, and treasurer. Beware that the CSLB may discover that the licensee’s personnel of record are incomplete or incorrect when reviewing a license renewal application, because it will compare the SOS’s records to the license renewal application. A license renewal application requires the licensee to list its qualifier and personnel of record. If the SOS and CSLB records do not match, this could delay approval of the license renewal application until the missing personnel are added and fingerprinted. Reprinted courtesy of Amy Pierce, Lewis Brisbois, Mark Oertel, Lewis Brisbois and John Lubitz, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Pierce may be contacted at Amy.Pierce@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Oertel may be contacted at Mark.Oertel@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Lubitz may be contacted at John.Lubitz@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    June 08, 2020 —
    A bill prohibiting the use of anti-concurrent causation clauses in homeowners' insurance policies has been introduced before the New Jersey legislature. The bill is here. Under an anti-concurrent causation clause, the policy bars coverage if two perils (i.e., wind and water damage) contribute to a loss and one peril is excluded from coverage. For example, wind damage alone may be covered, while water damage is excluded. If both wind and water contribute to the loss, regardless of the degree to which each peril contributes, the anti-concurrent causation clause would bar coverage. New Jersey S 217 states,
    An insurer authorized to transact the business of homeowners insurance in this state shall not exclude coverage in a homeowners insurance policy for loss or damage caused by a peril insured against under the terms of the policy on the grounds that the loss or damage occurred concurrently or in any sequence with a peril not insured against under the terms of the policy. Any such provision to exclude coverage shall be void and unenforceable.
    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

    Ensuring Efficient Arbitration of Construction Disputes Involving Mechanic’s Liens

    February 18, 2020 —
    There may be tension between the enforcement of statutory mechanic’s lien claims when a contractual dispute resolution provision calls for arbitration. Once the parties are in arbitration, it may not be clear whether the arbitrator has authority to make factual determinations regarding amount and validity of mechanic’s liens, and whether courts are bound by these determinations. This uncertainty stems from the fact that in most states a mechanic’s lien can only be enforced by a court of competent jurisdiction. Indeed, many mechanic’s liens statutes define foreclosure as a “judicial process,” and courts generally have exclusive jurisdiction to issue orders foreclosing on real property1. The risk for contractors and owners is that they will spend time and money re-litigating factual issues related to proving elements of a mechanic’s lien claim, including the proper lien amount, timeliness and other prerequisites. Without a clear understanding of what issues and elements are arbitrable, the parties run the risk that an arbitrator will rule on certain elements only to find out during post-arbitration lien foreclosure proceedings that the arbitrator lacked authority to make determinations on those elements. Questions therefore arise whether a court will enforce the arbitrator’s determinations and whether the parties must relitigate mechanic’s lien issues creating a further risk of inconsistent rulings. These risks can be minimized through arbitration provisions which address these issues, express requests in arbitration demands and by ensuring that arbitration awards contain explicit determinations of mechanic’s liens issues. Reprinted courtesy of Robert G. Campbell & Trevor B. Potter, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Potter may be contacted at tpotter@coxcastle.com Mr. Campbell may be contacted at rcampbell@coxcastle.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    August 27, 2013 —
    In a decision authored by Judge Leslie E. Koybayashi, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii followed its prior decisions that construction defect claims were not covered because such claims do not arise from an occurrence. Nautilus Ins. Co. v. 3 Builders, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88480 (D. Haw. June 24, 2013). 3 Builders, the insured, was sued by the Apartment Owners of Mililani Pinnacle for the faulty installation of a new roof. Pinnacle claimed the completed roofs were not properly installed.complaint alleged breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and other causes of action. 3 Builders tendered the defense to Nautilus, who accepted the tender and defended for three years. Nautilus, however, filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment on its coverage obligations. Nautilus sought summary judgment, contending there was no coverage because all of the claims arose from the contractual relationship to perform the roof work, and a breach of contract was not the type of fortuitous event covered by a CGL policy under Hawaii law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    June 11, 2014 —
    In Lexology, Amy Kuo Alexander of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP analyzed recent decisions involving California’s Right to Repair Act, SB 800. According to Alexander, “SB 800, applies to all new residential construction sold after January 1, 2003” and “[i]t establishes a process to resolve certain construction defect claims prior to the filing of any lawsuit by a homeowner of new residential construction.” Alexander’s three main discussion points include “SB 800 is Not the Exclusive Remedy,” “Notice Requirements to Builder Under SB 800,” and “Parties Can Opt Out of SB 800 to Adopt Their Own Prelitigation Procedure So Long as the Terms Are Not Unconscionable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Occurrence Found, Business Risk Exclusions Do Not Bar Coverage for Construction Defects

    May 13, 2014 —
    The court determined that the supplier of cement for the construction of pools had coverage for alleged construction defects in the finished pools. Harleysville Worcester Ins. Co. v. Paramount Concrete, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43889 (D. Conn. March 31, 2014). R.I. Pools sued Paramount, a manufacturer and supplier of shotcrete, after cracking appeared in nineteen pools built by R.I. Pools using Paramount's shotcrete. The jury awarded R.I. Pools compensatory damages of $2,760,000. Paramount's insurer, Harleysville, defended under a reservation of rights. After the verdict, Harleysville filed for a declaratory judgment that there was no coverage under the CGL policy. Paramount filed for partial summary judgment. Harleysville first argued there was no occurrence. The policy's definition of occurrence included the phrase, "continuous exposure." This broadened the term "occurrence" beyond the word accident to include a situation where damage occurred over a period of time, rather than suddenly or instantaneously. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    March 19, 2015 —
    In the world of Pennsylvania mechanics’ liens there is much confusion about the interchangeable use of the words mechanics lien “waiver” and mechanics’ lien “release.” Many who work in the world of real estate in Pennsylvania, be they contractors, subcontractors, developers, lenders, or attorneys, use these terms interchangeably without understanding that there is a meaningful difference. Failure to understand the difference creates confusion when discussing issues and drafting documents regarding mechanics’ liens. In Pennsylvania a mechanics’ lien “waiver” is the pre-construction waiver of liens that was historically executed by a general contractor and an owner and filed with the Prothonotary in the county in which construction is located. These pre-construction lien “waivers,” assuming they were properly prepared, signed by the contractor and owner and filed in accordance with applicable law, negated the ability of that contractor and its subcontractors to file a mechanics’ lien on the subject property. These pre-construction lien “waivers” were part of every construction loan closing up through the amendments to the Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien Act that went into effect in 2007. Since 2007, the Mechanics’ Lien Act has been amended twice to further address those circumstances in which pre-construction lien waivers still have vitality. Except with respect to those narrow situations specifically provided for in the statute, pre-construction lien “waivers” are against public policy in Pennsylvania. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Thomas C. Rogers, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Rogers may be contacted at rogerst@whiteandwilliams.com

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    January 28, 2019 —
    As anyone who reads this construction blog on a regular basis knows, I believe that the move to newer sustainable building practices (while bringing about a new or different set of potential risks) is both necessary and laudable. Because of this fact, you may be asking why the headline for today’s post. After all, I am a LEED AP and assisted in the drafting of the LEED/Green Building addendum to the ConsensusDOCS so I must be pro LEED (or any other) certification of buildings. To the extent that such certification encourages best practices and more sustainable building stock, I am pro certification. However, certification is not a necessary carrot to bring builders around to such practices. As a recent article in EcoHome Magazine (thanks to Todd Hawkins at BuilderFish for alerting me to the article) points out, companies are already moving toward these practices with or without certification and it’s added layer of expense. Economic, air quality, and moral (“its the right thing to do”) factors are pushing executives to such practices. According to EcoHome Magazine, while LEED retains the lions share of green certifications, more and more companies are either using internal standards or trying out other certification programs, including Energy Star. 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