BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    How Concrete Mistakes Added Cost to the Recent Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge Project

    Environmental Law Violations: When you Should Hire a Lawyer

    Impasse Over Corruption Charges Costs SNC $3.7 Billion, CEO Says

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Melissa Pang Elected Vice President of APABA-PA Board of Directors

    Thank You to Virginia Super Lawyers

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    It Was a Wild Week for Just About Everyone. Ok, Make that Everyone.

    Extrinsic Evidence, or Eight Corners? Texas Court Sheds Light on Determining the Duty to Defend

    Tesla Finishes First Solar Roofs—Including Elon's House

    Construction Defect Claims Not Covered

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    Housing Starts in U.S. Surge to Seven-Year High as Weather Warms

    Guidance for Construction Leaders: How Is the Americans With Disabilities Act Applied During the Pandemic?

    Contractual Fee-Shifting in Litigation: Who Pays the Price?

    Considerations in Obtaining a Mechanic’s Lien in Maryland (Don’t try this at home)

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/31/24) – International Homebuying Shrinks Commercial Real Estate Focus on Sustainability, and U.S. Banks Boost Provisions for Credit Losses

    Contract’s Definition of “Substantial Completion” Does Not Apply to Third Party for Purposes of SOL, Holds Court of Appeal

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Falls to Lowest Since Early 1995

    99-Year-Old Transmission Tower Seen as Possible Cause of Devastating Calif. Wildfire

    Brief Overview of Rights of Unlicensed Contractors in California

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

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

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    Insuring Lease/Leaseback Projects

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Judge Nixes SC's $100M Claim Over MOX Construction Delays

    The Importance of the Recent Amendment to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence

    Ritzy NYC Tower Developer Says Residents’ Lawsuit ‘Ill-Advised’

    Mutual Or Concurrent Delay Caused By Subcontractors

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    Minnesota Senate Office Building Called Unconstitutional

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Constructive Changes – A Primer

    Additional Insured Prevails on Summary Judgment For Duty to Defend, Indemnify

    COVID-19 Information and Resources

    Developer Transition – Washington DC Condominiums

    Todd Seelman Recognized as Fellow of Wisconsin Law Foundation

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Give a Little Extra …”

    The Construction Lawyer as Problem Solver

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Partner Lawrence J. Bracken II Awarded Emory Public Interest Committee’s 2024 Lifetime Commitment to Public Service Award

    Notes from the Nordic Smart Building Convention

    OSHA’s COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard Is in Flux

    Speeding up Infrastructure Projects with the Cloud

    ICYMI: Highlights From ABC Convention 2024
    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

    The Peak of Hurricane Season Is Here: How to Manage Risks Before They Manage You

    September 21, 2020 —
    The Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1 to Nov. 30, but it peaks sharply during August, September and October. The latest forecasts predict this will be one of the most active seasons in history, in terms of frequency and severity, though it is always important to remember that even a single hurricane or tropical storm making landfall can still be a devastating event. Hurricanes pose unique risks to the construction industry ranging from project and labor force disruptions to concerns about the availability and price of construction materials. This is even more true this year, which requires merging hurricane preparedness and response plans with the realities of COVID-19. Because hurricanes cannot be avoided, preparing for them is the only way to manage these risks. Ensuring the personal safety and wellbeing of affected individuals is the first priority. After that, here are some key issues, and suggestions for handling them, that may help guide construction companies through the storm. SITE PROTECTION Construction contracts often place responsibility for site protection on contractors. Where those duties exist, failing to properly carry them out can lead to enormous losses that then turn into liability claims. This could be anything from removing materials that can become projectiles, covering exposed ventilation shafts, and sealing electrical conduits to ensuring that key equipment such as generators and pumps can remain functional in a storm. One way to approach it is to imagine sustained 100-mph winds and relentless water, and then make sure preparedness efforts are likely to survive that kind of test. This is not the time for guessing. It is far better to go through a rigorous analytical process now than in a courtroom years later. Reprinted courtesy of Vincent E. Morgan, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appeals Court Reverses Summary Judgment over Defective Archway Construction

    February 10, 2012 —

    A judge has ruled that a plaintiff can go forward with her suit that she was injured by a defective archway during a birthday party. A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeals issued this ruling on January 23, 2012, in the case of Trujillo v. Cosio.

    Ms. Trujillo attended a birthday party at the home of Maria Cosio and Joel Verduzco. A piñata was hung between a tree and a brick archway. Ms. Trujillo went to get candy that had fallen from the piñata, during which the archway fell on her hand. Subsequent examination of the archway showed that it had not been “properly anchored to the supporting pillars to protect the arch from falling.”

    Ms. Cosio and Mr. Verduzco argued that they could not have been aware of the defective nature of the archway’s construction, as it had been built at the request of the prior property owner. The structure was constructed without building permits. Mark Burns, a civil engineer testifying for the plaintiff, said that “a reasonable property owner would have thoroughly tested the archway to ensure it was capable of withstanding such horizontal forces before allowing children to enter into the area.” Mr. Burns noted that twenty rope pulls would have been sufficient to demonstrate the structure’s instability.

    The trial court rejected Mr. Burn’s statements, finding that the respondents did not have any knowledge of the defect and that a visual inspection should have sufficed. The court noted that this a triable issue, whether visual inspection suffices, or whether the property owners should have done as Mr. Burns suggested and yank a rope twenty times. The court noted that “although a jury may ultimately disagree with Burn’s opinion, it was supported by sufficient foundation and was not speculative.”

    The opinion was written by Judge Flier, with Judges Rubin and Grimes concurring.

    Read the court’s decison…

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

    Locals Concerns over Taylor Swift’s Seawall Misdirected

    January 13, 2014 —
    Homeowners in Westerly, Rhode Island have been concerned about alterations made to a seawall below Taylor Swift’s seaside home in Rhode Island, particularly in that some large boulders have been moved to the shore. But officials with Rhode Island’s Coastal Resource Management Council have assured residents that the work is being done at their request, according to the Westerly Sun. In addition to moving boulders, the project repairs an existing seawall which was damaged by Hurricane Sandy. The cost is estimated to be $2 million. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arizona Court of Appeals Upholds Judgment on behalf of Homeowners against Del Webb Communities for Homes Riddled with Construction Defects

    February 26, 2015 —
    ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDS LOWER COURT DECISION APPROVING $13,703,039 JUDGMENT ON BEHALF OF 460 SUN CITY GRAND HOMEOWNERS AGAINST DEL WEBB COMMUNITIES, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF PULTEGROUP, INC., FOR HOMES RIDDLED WITH CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS --In a separate case, an Arizona Superior Court awards $10,619,640 to another 279 Sun City Grand homeowners who sued Del Webb over construction defects, which Del Webb has appealed-- PHOENIX, Arizona – The Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, [on Tuesday] issued a unanimous ruling upholding a lower court decision awarding $13,703,039 to 460 Sun City Grand homeowners who sued developer Del Webb Communities, Inc., a subsidiary of PulteGroup, Inc., for numerous construction defects that severely damaged the plaintiffs’ homes. Sun City Grand is an age-restricted community located in Surprise. In a separate case, an Arizona Superior Court awarded $10,619,640 to another group of 279 Sun City Grand homeowners for multiple construction defects in their homes. Stephen Weber, the managing partner in the Phoenix office of Kasdan Weber Turner LLP, which represents the homeowners, said that the case is based on construction defects that damaged the plaintiffs’ homes and took several years to resolve. The defects include defective windows, poorly installed stucco, expansive soil conditions that resulted in cracking of drywall, and deteriorating concrete foundation systems, among other problems. “Del Webb placed an arbitration clause in the sales contracts and the homeowners honored it. The binding arbitration that includes the owners of 460 homes in Sun City Grand was completed in late 2011 when the arbitration panel unanimously awarded the homeowners $13,703,039. Del Webb then challenged the award in Superior Court and the Superior Court confirmed the award in full,” Weber explained. “Del Webb did not like the Superior Court ruling either and challenged it in the Court of Appeals. And now three justices of the Arizona Court of Appeals have unanimously affirmed the Superior Court order and the arbitration award stands. Now they will have the funds to repair their homes, restore their value, and live in comfort,” Weber said. The $13,703,309 award includes amounts for home repairs, attorney fees, expert fees, court costs and pre-judgment interest. An additional $1,401,236 in post-judgment interest also accrued while the case was on appeal. The other construction defect case that awarded $10,619,640 to homeowners was not covered by binding arbitration. Del Webb has also appealed that case which will now go through the appeals process. That could take two to three years and again the homeowners will have to wait for the final judgment, Weber noted. Ken Kasdan, senior and managing partner of the Kasdan Weber Turner firm and one of the nation’s leading experts on construction defect litigation, said the defects are egregious. “The multiple defects rob them of pride of ownership,” he said. “A home is something that a homeowner wants to be proud of. Unfortunately, defective workmanship and poor construction have caused damage to the homes. Now these homes can be repaired and the homeowners will no longer have to deal with defective windows and cracked slabs. Developers need to understand that arbitration awards are final and binding,” Kasdan noted. The Kasdan Weber Turner law firm has offices in Phoenix, Arizona and in Irvine, California and Walnut Creek, California. The firm represents property owners in major construction defect litigation. For more information on the firm, visit www.kasdancdlaw.com. Stephen Weber may be contacted at (602) 224-7800. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Anti-Assignment Provision Unenforceable in Kentucky

    December 20, 2012 —
    On a certified question from the Federal District Court, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided that an anti-assignment provision in a policy is unenforceable.Wehr Constructors v. Paducah Div. Assur. Co. of Am., 2012 Ky. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Oct. 25, 2012). Before building an addition to its hospital, Murray Calloway County Hospital purchased a builder's risk policy from Assurance Company of America.The policy provided, "Your rights and duties under this policy may not be transferred without Assurance's written consent . . . ." The Hospital contracted with Wehr Constructors to install concrete subsurfaces and vinyl floors in order to expand the hospital. After installation, a portion of the floors and subsurface work was damaged. The Hospital submitted a claim to Assurance for $75,000, but the claim was denied. Wehr sued the Hospital to recover money for its work on the construction project. In settling the case, the Hospital assigned to Wehr any claim or rights the Hospital had against Assurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii.
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Best Practices After Receiving Notice of a Construction Claim

    July 18, 2022 —
    Being served with a lawsuit is typically not a welcomed experience. However, a construction professional that has been proactive in an early investigation of the claim will be better equipped to defend the case. The following best practices should be used by construction professionals as soon as a potential claim becomes evident. Notify Immediately after the receipt of a claim or notice of an incident, efforts should be made to notify all essential parties. This includes any potential insurers that may provide coverage for the claim as well as any parties to whom notice may be required or warranted under the project contract and/or scope of work. Some construction contracts contain an insurance clause that requires one party to provide additional insured coverage under its liability policy to another party. Notice should be given to any insurer that potentially provides additional insured coverage as soon as possible. The failure to provide an insurance company with prompt notice of a potential claim could result in the denial of the claim. Reprinted courtesy of Lauren Meadows, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    HB 20-1046 - Private Retainage Reform - Postponed Indefinitely

    May 04, 2020 —
    On Tuesday, February 18th, the Colorado House Business Affairs & Labor Committee voted 10-0 to postpone indefinitely House Bill 1046. If it had been enacted, HB 1046 would have required, for all for all construction contracts of at least $150,000:
    • A property owner to make partial payments to the contractor of any amount due under the contract at the end of each calendar month or as soon as practicable after the end of the month;
    • A property owner to pay the contractor at least 95% of the value of satisfactorily completed work;
    • A property owner to pay the withheld percentage within 60 days after the contract is completed satisfactorily;
    • A contractor to pay a subcontractor for work performed under a subcontract within 30 calendar days after receiving payment for the work, not including a withheld percentage not to exceed 5%;
    • A subcontractor to pay any supplier, subcontractor, or laborer who provided goods, materials, labor, or equipment to the subcontractor within 30 calendar days after receiving payment under the subcontract; and
    • A subcontractor to submit to the contractor a list of the suppliers, sub-subcontractors, and laborers who provided goods, materials, labor, or equipment to the subcontractor for the work.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    March 31, 2014 —
    According to The Courier-Journal, in August of 2009 “raw sewage” backed “up into several houses during a torrential downpour” in Jeffersonville, Indiana. Now, a “Clark County judge has ordered the city of Jeffersonville to pay nearly $100,000 plus 8 percent annual interest for the city's negligence that led to” the incident. The problems allegedly began after a new lift station and force main, which “previously flowed southward to the Ohio River,” was “re-routed it to Springdale.” The city was eventually “cited by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management for failing to obtain a required local permit for the Springdale upgrade.” The Courier-Journal reported that Jeffersonville “agreed to take several steps to remedy the problem for residents and satisfy the state, which ultimately considered the issue resolved in October 2012.” Since the upgrade was completed, there have not been any further sewer backups, according to the city’s utility director, Len Ashack, as quoted by The Courier-Journal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of