BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction experts
    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 Contracts and The Uniform Commercial Code: When Does it Apply and Understanding the Pre-Dominant Factor Test

    Athletic Trainers Help Workers Get Back to the Jobsite and Stay Healthy After Injury

    Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- A Wrap Up

    Water Damage: Construction’s Often Unnoticed Threat

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    No Duty to Defend Additional Insured for Construction Defects

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Biden Administration Issues Buy America Guidance for Federal Infrastructure Funds

    Health Officials Concerned About Lead-Tainted Dust Created by Detroit Home Demolitions

    Seven Trends That Impact Commercial Construction Litigation in 2021

    Insurer's Late Notice Defense Fails on Summary Judgment

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Fifteen White and Williams Lawyers

    Policy's Operation Classification Found Ambiguous

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment Award to Insurer on Hurricane Damage Claim

    Damage Caused Not by Superstorm Sandy, But by Faulty Workmanship, Not Covered

    It’s a COVID-19 Pandemic; It’s Everywhere – New Cal. Bill to Make Insurers Prove Otherwise

    Exploring the Future of Robotic Construction with Dr. Thomas Bock

    “Other Insurance” and Indemnity Provisions Determine Which Insurer Must Cover

    Sick Leave, Paid Time Off, and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act

    New York Team Secures Appellate Win on Behalf of National Home Improvement Chain

    Indiana Appellate Court Allows Third-Party Spoliation Claim to Proceed

    Architect Norman Foster Tells COP26: Change 'Traditional' City Design to Combat Climate Change

    Disputes Over Arbitrator Qualifications: The Northern District of California Offers Some Guidance

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Abandons "Integrated Systems Analysis" for Determining Property Damage

    Steel Component Plant Linked to West Virginia Governor Signs $1M Pollution Pact

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    Manhattan Luxury Condos Sit on Market While Foreign Buyers Wait

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

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

    Getting U.S to Zero Carbon Will Take a $2.5 Trillion Investment by 2030

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    In Supreme Court Showdown, California Appeals Courts Choose Sides Regarding Whether Right to Repair Act is Exclusive Remedy for Homeowners

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    Conflicting Exclusions Result in Duty to Defend

    Preventing Common Electrical Injuries on the Jobsite

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    Court Holds That Trimming of Neighbor’s Trees is Not an Insured Accident or Occurrence

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    School District Practice Bulletin: Loose Lips Can Sink More Than Ships

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode
    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

    Helsinki Stream City: A Re-imagining Outside the System

    August 13, 2019 —
    Modern man lives under the illusion of being the most intelligent being out there. This is the paradox of human nature; we all want to make the best decisions with the knowledge we have at any given time, but on the other hand, our thinking is largely based on how our ancestors organized the world in their time. Possibly the most tangible example of this in our everyday lives is infrastructure. While there seems to be plenty of candidates offering new solutions to the already existing urban environment, there are not that many looking to challenge the current urban order. Cities are full of talk—but who walks the walk? Re-imagining Urban Environments Olli Hakanen, a long-term specialist in re-imagining workspaces and urban environments, has an extensive background in both architecture and consultancy. His latest venture, Respace, aims to address how urban environments are being developed to better suit the needs of their residents as well as the environment. According to the ideology behind Respace, instead of always building something new, often all that is needed is a re-thinking. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jenni Ripatti, AEC Business
    AEC Business may be contacted at info@aec-business.com

    Illusory Insurance Coverage: Real or Unreal?

    August 24, 2017 —
    In insurance coverage declaratory relief actions, there are times an insured will argue that the insurance policy coverage is illusory. Typically, an insured will raise this illusory argument if its insurer is denying coverage based on an exclusion or limitation in the policy. If a court agrees and deems the coverage illusory, the court will construe the policy to afford coverage to the insured. This is the obvious value of the argument: coverage! “A policy is illusory only if there is an internal contradiction that completely negates the coverage it expresses to provide.” The Warwick Corp. v. Turetsky, 42 Fla.L.Weekly D1797a (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Thus, if a policy grants coverage in one section but then excludes the same coverage in another section, the coverage would be deemed illusory. Id. quoting Tire Kingdom, Inc. v. First S. Ins. Co., 573 So.2d 885, 887 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). An illusory policy was found in the following examples: (a) a policy covered certain intentional torts but then excluded intended acts; (b) a policy covered advertising injury but elsewhere excluded advertising injury; and (c) a policy covered parasailing but excluded watercrafts. Id. (citations omitted). In all examples, coverage in the policy was completely swallowed up by an exclusion rendering the coverage illusory. Stated differently, coverage was completely contradicted by an exclusion in the policy rendering the policy absurd. 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

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    March 29, 2017 —
    In a recent Georgia Court of Appeals case, the Court was tasked with determining whether the City of Atlanta’s compliance with the Georgia Payment Bond Statutes barred a subcontractor from recovery against it after the general contractor failed to pay and the surety became insolvent. Squared Plumbing Co., LLC (J. Squared), was a subcontractor on a project to clean up sewage spills in approximately 100 dwellings for the City of Atlanta. As required by the contract executed with the City, the general contractor, Scott and Sons Holdings, LLC (Scott and Sons), obtained a $200,000 payment bond from its surety, First Seaford Surety, Inc. (First Seaford). J. Squared sought to collect on the payment bond when Scott and Sons failed to pay J. Squared for the work it performed on the project. However, First Seaford became insolvent. J. Squared subsequently filed a claim against Scott and Sons and the City to recover $140,000 for its work on the project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    May 24, 2018 —
    This year’s annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar was once again, a huge success. On May 16-18, 2018 attendees from the legal, insurance, builder, contractor, subcontractor and numerous other industries came from across the United States and several foreign countries to discuss current trends, learn about new laws and regulations affecting the construction defect industry, and meet up with colleagues. Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.’s (BHA) Has a Nice Swing Golf Challenge raised $3,500.00 split evenly between the three deserving charities supported by West Coast Casualty: Hawaii’s Children’s Cancer Foundation , St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and Shriners Hospital for Children. The West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar has been promoting charitable work for the past twenty-five years. Each year, they promote different charities, and provide multiple ways for individuals and companies to contribute. Whether it’s Buy a Banner, Tennis Shoe Thursday, or Flip Flop Friday, industry members are given opportunities to support worthwhile causes. WCC also supports charitable organizations through every award that they present each year. Donations are made in the winner’s name: For Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence awardees, Habitat for Humanity as well as a local California and Nevada charity; For Legend of an Era Award, the designated charity of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar; and for The Larry Syhre Commitment to Service Award, a donation to The Larry Syhre Foundation. BHA hopes to see you at the next West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar in 2019! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    February 07, 2014 —
    CFO to CEO: “I have bad news, the developer on our biggest project has run out of money.” Frightening words for sure, but contractors should not overlook the bonded stop notice in situations where the construction lender seemingly has expended all construction funds. The recent case of Brewer Corporation v. Point Center Financial, Inc. 2014 WL 346636 illustrates this point. Contractors have two options at their disposal to secure payment on private works of improvement. The first is the mechanics lien. However, construction loan trust deeds are normally recorded prior to the commencement of construction and therefore have priority over mechanics liens. Connolly Development, Inc. v. Superior Court (1976) 17 Cal.3d 803, 827. Enter the bonded stop notice. The bonded stop notice requires the lender to withhold unexpended funds and, if it fails to do so, it is personally liable to the claimant for the full amount of the claim. But the stop notice also has the power of “priority” over any assignment of construction loan funds, whether before or after a stop notice is served. Civil Code § 3166, now Civil Code § 8544. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    January 22, 2013 —
    Austin, Texas has torn down a school gym, the Turner-Roberts Recreation Center at the Overton Elementary School, due to structural problems which became evident after the gym was completed four years ago. The cost of the new gym is $6.4 million, more than the cost of building the gym in the first place. The city is paying $3 million in repair costs with the rest of the money coming from the companies that designed and built the now demolished gym. According to the Austin Statesman, the total cost to the city will be about $8.6 million. The Turner-Roberts Recreation Center cost $5.6 million to build, but soon after it opened, structural problems were discovered. Cracks formed in walls and glass doors buckled. The settlement with the designer, contractor, and engineering firm did not require the firms to admit fault as they paid $3.4 million to fix the situation. The Statesman was unable to get a breakdown of how much each firm paid. Tom Cornelius, president of the GSC, the architectural firm on the project told the Statesman that "the foundation issues were not caused by design defects." Initially, the city sought to repair the gym, but early excavation determined that the defects were too extensive. In addition to the structural flaws, it was also determined that the HVAC system was faulty. Excavation also damaged plumbing work. Tearing down the gym turned out to be the most cost-effective response. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    December 19, 2018 —
    Worker safety concerns sparked a new plan on how to demolish the remnants of the old Tappan Zee Bridge in New York. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eydie Cubarrubia, ENR
    Ms. Cubarrubia may be contacted at cubarrubiae@enr.com

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    November 26, 2014 —
    The insurer properly denied coverage for a bulge in a warehouse wall that the insured claimed was caused by Hurricane Ike. Russell v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143882 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2014). Hurricane Ike displaced metal roof coverings on the insured's warehouse, causing interior water damage to several rooms. Scottsdale eventually paid $84,820.36 for the loss of the roof, less the deductible. The parties disagreed on whether a horizontal bulge on the north wall of the warehouse was also caused by the hurricane. The bulging portion of the wall was not cracked, but cracks were seen around the corners and windows. The insured admitted to an engineer retained by Scottsdale that the cracks in the exterior walls had been filled with caulking on several occasions prior to Hurricane Ike. Scottsdale denied coverage for the damage to the north wall under exclusions for soil sinking, rising, or shifting and for damage from faulty, inadequate or defective design, construction, and repair.The insured later sent a demand for $800,000 for the damage to the wall. A suit was eventually filed by the insured. 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