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


    Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts

    Phillips & Jordan Awarded $176M Everglades Restoration Contract

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Connecticut Grapples With Failing Concrete Foundations

    Combating Climate Change by Reducing Embodied Energy in the Built Environment

    North Carolina Should Protect Undocumented Witnesses to Charlotte Scaffolding Deaths, Unions Say

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Honors Four Partners as ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    Bank Window Lawsuit Settles Quietly

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Texas Supreme Court Cements Exception to “Eight-Corners” Rule Through Two Recent Rulings

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Contractors Pay Heed: The Federal Circuit Clarifies Two Important Issues For Bid Protestors

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    Opoplan Introduces Generative AI Tools for Home-Building

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    The ARC and The Covenants

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    Best Practices for Installing Networks in New Buildings

    Los Angeles Is Building a Future Where Water Won’t Run Out

    Which Cities have the Most Affordable Homes?

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    California’s Wildfire Dilemma: Put Houses or Forests First?

    CGL Coverage for Liquidated Damages and the Contractual Liability Exclusion

    Designing a Fair Standard of Care in Design Agreements

    Independent Contractor v. Employee. The “ABC Test” Does Not Include a Threshold Hiring Entity Test

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    Architect Sues over Bidding Procedure

    No Coverage for Counterclaim Arising from Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    Preparing For the Worst with Smart Books & Records

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    Texas Plans a Texas-Sized Response to Rising Seas

    New York's De Blasio Unveils $41 Billion Plan for Affordable Housing

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    Owners and Contractors Beware: Pennsylvania (Significantly) Strengthens Contractor Payment Act

    Why Construction Law- An Update

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    BHA Attending the Construction Law Conference in San Antonio, TX

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    Travelers v. Larimer County and the Concept of Covered Cause of Loss

    Modernist Houses Galore! [visual candy for architects]

    Minnesota Supreme Court Dismisses Vikings Stadium Funding Lawsuit

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    Get to Know BJ Siegel: Former Apple Executive and Co-Founder of Juno
    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. Leveraging 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

    Homeowners May Not Need to Pay Lien on Defective Log Cabin

    July 01, 2011 —

    The Idaho Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Perception Construction Management v. Bell. The Bells hired PCM to build a log home, agreeing to play monthly invoices in full within ten days. The Bells paid the first four invoices in full, part of the fifth, and ceased payment after that. Beofre seventh invoice, the Bells terminated the contract and hired a new contractor. PCM filed a claim of lien and ceased work.

    The Bells responded that PCM was in breach of contract and had failed to fulfill the contract in a workmanlike manner. They claimed construction defects and in the lien suit, sought to include testimony from an architect and a plumber reviewing PCM’s work. The court only allowed the architect to testify as to whether the amount of the lien was reasonable. No testimony was permitted from the plumber.

    The Idaho Supreme Court concluded that the claims of construction defects were important to case and remanded it to the lower court for a new trial taking into evidence that Bell’s contention that PCM’s work was defective.

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    December 20, 2021 —
    The Contract Disputes Act establishes the formal process for resolving nearly all claims and disputes that arise under federal government contracts. It is the source of the requirement that contractors certify claims in excess of $100,000, the contracting officer’s final decision and the deadlines for bringing a dispute to the court of federal claims or an agency board of contract appeals. It is also the source of the federal government’s authority to use mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution. Here are six key factors contractors should know about mediating contract claims and disputes at the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA). 1. The Parties Control the Parameters of ADR Proceedings Many commercial contracts and court rules require mediation of every dispute. There is no settlement meeting, mediation or any other type of mandatory ADR proceedings in cases brought to the ASBCA. The parties control the process, and they may adopt any approach to ADR that they believe will be effective. Mediation is nevertheless voluntary. Without the agreement of both parties, it won’t happen. Reprinted courtesy of Brian Waagner, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Private Statutory Cause of Action Under Florida’s Underground Facility Damage Prevention and Safety Act

    July 11, 2021 —
    Florida’s Underground Facility Damage Prevention and Safety Act is set forth in Florida Statutes Chapter 556. Any owner or operator of underground infrastructure as well as contractors that perform underground excavation and demolition operations are familiar (or, need to be familiar) with this Act and the requirements it imposes on them. In a nutshell, this Act requires excavators to notify operators of underground facilities (e.g., pipelines, cables, sewers) through a notification system before excavating or demolishing an underground location. Then notification system gives the operator of the underground facility two days’ advance notice that an excavation will be taking place. After receiving this notice, the operator of the underground facility must mark the area where its infrastructure is located which could be affected by the underground excavation or demolition operations. The Act further imposes duties on excavators to use increased caution, supervise mechanized equipment, perform excavation and demolition operations in a careful an prudent manner, and to re-notify the notification system if the operator’s marking is no longer visible so the location of the operator’s underground facility can be re-marked. 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

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    August 21, 2023 —
    Architects and Engineers are sometimes pleasantly surprised to find out that they, also, can terminate those crazy, hard to deal with Owners—at least, if the Owners fail to make payments as required. You can also terminate for Owner delays to the work, or where you think the contractor should be fired but the Owner disagrees. Again, the standard 7 days written notice is required. (See B101 §9.4). Do you have to walk off the job if they are not paying you? No—you could exercise the smaller remedy of suspending services (with 7 days written notice) until payments are caught up or the contract performance is corrected by the Owner. (See B101 §9.1). Suspension rather than outright termination is a softer approach when working with an owner you do not want to burn (too many) bridges with. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    The Proposed House Green New Deal Resolution

    February 27, 2019 —
    A Resolution has been proposed to the House for consideration that would recognize the Federal Government’s duty “to create a Green New Deal.” It sets forth a very ambitious 10-year program to mobilize and transform every aspect of American life to combat the threats of climate change by transitioning to an economy based upon 100% clean and renewable energy. In doing so, millions of new jobs would be created, and everyone who wants a job would be guaranteed a job. The sponsors’ talking points declare that there is no time to lose, that Americans love a challenge, and “this is our moonshot.” The obvious goal is to eliminate the generation and use of fossil fuel and nuclear energy—they are simply not part of the solution. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    June 15, 2020 —
    Washington, D.C. (June 8, 2020) - Two recent Executive Orders (EO) aimed at promoting economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis offer regulatory and enforcement relief and encourage agencies to expedite infrastructure project approvals. The May 19, 2020 EO 13924, “Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery,” directs agencies to determine whether previous regulatory reforms would promote economic recovery if made permanent and encourages compliance assistance through exercising enforcement discretion, including declining enforcement. And the June 4, 2020 EO 13927, “Accelerating the Nation’s Economic Recovery from the COVID-19 Emergency by Expediting Infrastructure Investments and Other Activities,” aims to speed up the permitting process for infrastructure projects to strengthen the national economy. As businesses look to move forward and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, they should closely review these EOs for opportunities to take advantage of streamlined treatment and faster project approvals. EO 13294 supplements the Administration’s efforts to address the economic crisis brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic by encouraging federal agencies to rescind, modify, waive, or provide exemptions from federal regulations that may inhibit economic recovery and to provide guidance to businesses, particularly small businesses, on what is required of them under federal law for reopening. Specifically, the EO directs agency heads to identify regulatory standards that may inhibit economic recovery and consider rescinding or waiving those regulations, exempting regulated entities from compliance, exercising enforcement discretion, or extending regulatory compliance and enforcement deadlines. It also allows for compliance assistance through accelerated regulatory procedures to receive a pre-enforcement ruling and directs agencies to assess previous regulatory reforms to determine whether making them permanent would promote economic recovery. Since taking office, the Trump Administration has made regulatory reform a cornerstone of its agenda. This Executive Order is a continuation of the aggressive steps taken by the Administration to reduce the regulatory burden faced by American businesses that many argue increases operating costs, inhibits job creation, and stifles economic growth. Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois attorneys Karen C. Bennett, Jane C. Luxton and Amanda L. Tharpe Ms. Bennett may be contacted at Karen.Bennett@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Luxton may be contacted at Jane.Luxton@lewisbrisbois.com Ms. Tharpe may be contacted at Amanda.Tharpe@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Miller Law Firm Helped HOA Recover for Construction Defects without Filing a Lawsuit

    July 16, 2014 —
    According to a press release published on the PR Newswire, The Miller Law Firm “recovered $910,000 for the 1635 California Owners' Association for construction defects without ever filing a complaint.” William Nagle, Special Master & Mediator, facilitated the settlement “a year after putting the builder on notice under SB 800, California’s Right to Repair Law.” “Independent forensic expert inspections revealed building standard violations ranging from improperly installed gutters resulting in water intrusion in the units project wide, active leaks, standing water and inadequate gutters resulting in staining and efflorescence on the garage walls, balcony, and tile grout, discoloration and extensive cracking in the stucco project wide, inadequate weather stripping with evidence of condensation staining at windows, window frames and adjacent paint, inadequate ventilation, and ADA violations including loose glass guardrails and in regards to accessible rooftop common areas,” according to the press release. “This case settled prior to any formal mediation and I credit the diligence of both the Association and builder counsel,” Nagle stated. “Tom Miller is one of the most knowledgeable and respected plaintiffs' lawyers in the construction defect area. And I compliment both counsel on their preparation and cost-effective handling of the case in reaching a fair and reasonable result for their respective clients." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    July 22, 2024 —
    The American Arbitration Association (AAA) recently revised its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (“the Rules”). Several notable changes went into effect March 1, 2024, involving the scope of confidentiality, regular and fast track procedures, and updates to certain monetary thresholds. I. Revisions to Regular Track Procedures Rule 45: Confidentiality For the first time, confidentiality is now the default standard. Under Rule 45(a), arbitrators must keep all matters confidential unless otherwise required by law, court order or the agreement of the parties. Rule 45(b) allows a mediator to issue confidentiality orders and “take measures for protecting trade secrets and confidential information.” Rule 7: Consolidation and Joinder Under the new provisions, consolidation and joinder requests must be filed before confirmation of the Merits Arbitrator’s appointment. This language eliminates a previous option that allowed confirmation up to 90 days after filing of such requests. A failure to timely respond to a joinder request will result in a waiver of objections. Now, a party must establish both good cause and prejudice for a successful joinder request after confirmation of the arbitrator. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McKnight, Fox Rothschild LLP
    Mr. McKnight may be contacted at pmcknight@foxrothschild.com