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


    Key Legal Issues to Consider Before and After Natural Disasters

    A Year Later, Homeowners Still Repairing Damage from Sandy

    2016 Updates to CEB’s Mechanics Liens and Retail Leasing Practice Books Now Available

    Four Dead After Crane Collapses at Google’s Seattle Campus

    Collaborating or Competing with Construction Tech Startups

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    How Mansions Can Intensify Wildfires

    Home Builder Doesn’t See Long Impact from Hurricane

    Clean Energy and Conservation Collide in California Coastal Waters

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    How A Contractor Saved The Day On A Troubled Florida Condo Project

    Missouri Construction Company Sues Carpenter Union for Threatening Behavior

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    Skilled Labor Shortage Implications for Construction Companies

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    Not Everything is a Pollutant: A Summary of Recent Cases Supporting a Common Sense and Narrow Interpretation of the CGL's Pollution Exclusion

    San Francisco Bay Bridge Tower Rod Fails Test

    New Jersey Supreme Court Issue Important Decision for Homeowners and Contractors

    Florida Governor Bans Foreign Citizens From Buying Land in Florida

    Kushners Abandon Property Bid as Pressures Mount Over Conflicts

    Consumer Protection Act Whacks Seattle Roofing Contractor

    Coverage Found For Cleanup of Superfund Site Despite Pollution Exclusion

    U.K. High Court COVID-19 Victory for Policyholders May Set a Trend in the U.S.

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    Firm Claims Construction Defects in Hawaiian Homes

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    California Supreme Court to Examine Arbitration Provisions in Several Upcoming Cases

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    Key Takeaways For Employers in the Aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Halt to OSHA’s Vax/Testing Mandate

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    Appeals Court Rules that CGL Policy Doesn’t Cover Subcontractors’ Faulty Work

    Anthony Garasi, Jared Christensen and August Hotchkin are Recognized as Nevada Legal Elite

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    Are You Ready For 2015?

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Ackman Group Pays $91.5 Million for Condo at NYC’s One57

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    White House Seeks $310M To Fix Critical San Diego Wastewater Plant

    Be Careful With Construction Fraud Allegations

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Investigation of Orange County Landslide

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2024 “Best Law Firms” Rankings
    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

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    November 18, 2011 —

    OSHA calculates that for each 33,000 active construction workers, one will die on the job each year, making their risk over the course of their careers at one out of every 200 workers. This puts it many times over OSHA’s definition of “significant risk” of 1 death per 1,000 workers over the course of their careers. According to an article in People’s World, “the main risk of death is from falls.”

    At a talk at the American Public Health Association’s meeting, one expert noted that “construction workers make up 6 percent to 8 percent of all workers, but account for 20 percent of all deaths on the job every year.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Town Sues over Defective Work on Sewer Lines

    January 13, 2014 —
    The Handy Sanitary District in North Carolina has filed a lawsuit against one of the subcontractors on the Badin Lake Sewer Project, which the Lexington Dispatch describes as “delay riddled.” The town claims that the materials used by Hobbs, Upchurch and Associates “were not adequate for the project.” Additionally, the town claims that valves were improperly installed or damaged, and that pipes were of the incorrect type and improperly connected. The Sanitary District Board of Commissioners has additionally settled a lawsuit over non-payment for work on the sewer project. The Handy Sanitary District has settled claims brought by Monroe Roadways Contractors and Young Construction with a payment of $250,000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hurricane Harvey Victims Face New Hurdles In Pursuing Coverage

    September 07, 2017 —
    Just as Hurricane Harvey departs the state, a new law in Texas, effective September 1, 2017, is going to make it more difficult for home and business owners to pursue claims against their insurance companies. Prior Texas law imposed liability on an insurer who violated the Insurance Code for the amount of the claim, interest on the amount of the claim at an annual interest rate of 18 percent, and reasonable attorney fees. H.B. 1774 was recently enacted to address legal actions for claims arising from damage to or loss of property due to hailstorms, lightening, wind, hurricane, rainstorm and other natural events. The bill creates additional procedural hurdles before a policy holder can file a lawsuit against the insurer. A written notice must be provided to the insurer at least 61 days before filing a lawsuit. The notice must include a statement of the acts giving rise to the claim, the specific amount alleged to be owed, and amount of reasonable and necessary attorney's fees already incurred by the policy holder. Once notice is received, the statute allows the insurers to send a written request to inspect, photograph, or evaluate the property. 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

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    May 06, 2024 —
    After WAY too long a hiatus, I am back with another in my series of “Construction Contract Basics” posts. In past posts, I’ve covered venue provisions, attorney fee provisions, and indemnity clauses. In this post, I’ll share a few thoughts (or “musings”) on the topic of so-called “no damages for delay” clauses. These clauses essentially state that a subcontractor’s only remedy for a delay caused by any factor beyond its control (including the fault of the general contractor), after proper notice to the owner or general contractor, is an extension of time to complete the work. These types of clauses generally make it impossible for a subcontractor (if found in a Subcontract) or Contractor (if found in a Prime Contract) that is delayed through no fault of its own to recover any damages relating to the expenses that are inevitably caused by such delays. Such expenses/damages could include additional supervisory time (including more high-dollar superintendent payments), acceleration costs, demobilization/mobilization costs, and other related expenses. These can add up to real money. Couple that with the inevitable liquidated damages or delay damages that will occur should a contractor or subcontractor cause any delay, and this becomes a very one-sided proposition. 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

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    December 20, 2021 —
    WASHINGTON, DC. – We are deeply saddened by the tragic tornado storms that ravaged six states across the Midwest and Southeastern portions of the U.S. last Friday evening, resulting in loss of life in five of those six states. Even though warnings were issued throughout the region, storms of this magnitude can be difficult to prepare for. Nevertheless, as civil engineers, our mission is to continually advance the design and construction of safe, reliable, and resilient building structures and infrastructure systems to mitigate the damage caused by storms. ASCE 7 — a nationally-adopted, consensus-based engineering standard that is the primary reference of structural design requirements in all U.S. building codes — was recently updated to include a new chapter for tornado loads in the 2022 edition. The new tornado provisions in ASCE 7-22 were a result of a decade-long effort in partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology following the 2011 Joplin, MO Tornado. ASCE 7-22 provides updated design requirements for a variety of structures, including many of the types impacted by Friday's storms. In an effort to assist, the Structural Engineering Institute of ASCE is currently offering free access to a report issued after the Joplin, MO tornado in 2011 that killed more than 150 people. Joplin, Missouri, Tornado of May 22, 2011: Structural Damage Survey and Case for Tornado-Resilient Building Codes presents the observations, findings, and recommendations of an engineering reconnaissance team that surveyed residential structures and schools in the tornado path shortly after the event. The EF 5 tornado cut a seven-mile swath through Joplin, Missouri; it destroyed more than 5,000 buildings and killed more than 150 people. We will continue to keep those who have been affected in our hearts and thoughts, and we share our heartfelt sympathies. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Damage Control: Major Rebuilds After Major Weather Events

    October 21, 2024 —
    More than two feet of rain drenching Fort Lauderdale in a day, baseball-sized hail chunks falling on Minneapolis and the deadliest wildfire in more than a century destroying more than 2,100 acres of Maui—2023 was a stark reminder that Mother Nature is a force to be reckoned with. In total, $28 billion dollars’ worth of extreme weather and climate-related disasters ripped across the U.S. last year—a new record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. And there’s no relief in sight: 2024 is already the second-busiest tornado season on the books, and wildfires were burning in Oregon, California, Montana and Texas as this issue went to print. Part of dealing with disasters is preparing for their impact to infrastructure, and Roland Orgeron Jr.—who co-founded New Orleans-based Legacy Industries with business partner Blake Couch in 2016—has been helping clients do just that. “We do a lot of consulting to identify vulnerabilities, and we offer action plans for companies based on potential storm scenarios,” Orgeron Jr. says. Some of those clients include large oil and gas companies with operations along the Mississippi River that cannot afford to be shut down for any extended period. “Before Hurricane Ida hit, we pre-positioned equipment inside some facilities, and we had guys responding the day after the storm to clear the area and assess the damage,” Orgeron Jr. says. During the immediate response to Hurricane Ida in 2021, the company’s work involved more than keeping the business locations up and running; they needed to help a business’ employees find a place to live. “We have a home stabilization contract with one oil and gas company designed to make sure their employees can get back to work as comfortably and quickly as possible,” Orgeron Jr. says. Reprinted courtesy of David McMillin, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    January 10, 2018 —

    Binding arbitration is an alternative to litigation. Instead of having your dispute decided by a judge and/or jury, it is decided by an arbitrator through an arbitration process. Arbitration, however, is a creature of contract, meaning there needs to be a contractual arbitration provision requiring the parties to arbitrate, and not litigate, their dispute. Just like litigation, there are pros and cons to the arbitration process, oftentimes dictated by the specific facts and legal issues in the case.

    What happens when a person executes two (or more) contemporaneous contracts, one with an arbitration provision and one without? Are the parties required to arbitrate the dispute arising out of the contract that does not contain the arbitration provision?

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Rejection’s a Bear- Particularly in Construction

    December 23, 2024 —
    As I read through this week’s cases published in Virginia Lawyers Weekly, I came across a case posing an interesting question. The question is, “If your bid is rejected along with everyone else’s, can you complain?” The short answer set out by the Rockingham County, Virginia Circuit Court is “No.” In the case of General Excavation v. City of Harrisonburg the Court looked at the Virginia Public Procurement Act’s bid protest provisions in Va. Code 2.2-4360 and 2.2-4364(C) in the context of General Excavation’s protest of the City’s failure to award it (or anyone else for that matter) the contract on which it was the low bidder. The controlling section of the statute allows a challenge to the award or proposed award of a contract. In defending the action, the City of Harrisonburg argued that, because the Procurement Act waived some of the city’s sovereign immunity, it must be read strictly. The city further argued (somewhat ironically) that, because no award of the contract was given or even proposed, General Excavation could not bring suit because it would not be challenging the “proposed award or award” of a contract. Not surprisingly, the Rockingham County court held with the City and strictly construed the statute against General Excavation in finding that General Excavation did not have the standing necessary to bring suit under the statute. 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