BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation 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


    The Prolonged Effects on Commercial Property From Extreme Weather

    Home insurance perks for green-friendly design (guest post)

    New Research Shows Engineering Firms' Impact on Economy, Continued Optimism on Business Climate

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Is Privity of Contract with the Owner a Requirement of a Valid Mechanic’s Lien? Not for GC’s

    Privette: The “Affirmative Contribution” Exception, How Far Does It Go?

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    LA’s $1.2 Billion Graffiti Towers Put on Sale After Bankruptcy

    Florida Accuses Pool Contractor of Violating Laws

    Suit Against Broker for Securing Inadequate Coverage Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Counsel Investigating Coverage Can be Sued for Invasion of Privacy

    Congratulations to Nicholas Rodriguez on His Promotion to Partner

    Charges in Kansas Water Park Death

    Bidder Be Thoughtful: The Impacts of Disclaimers in Pre-Bid Reports

    OSHA Investigating Bridge Accident Resulting in Construction Worker Fatality

    Mississippi exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Denver Condo Development Increasing, with Caution

    Effects of Amendment to Florida's Statute of Repose on the Products Completed Operations Hazard

    No Coverage for Installation of Defective Steel Framing

    An Era of Legends

    Corrective Action Protest Grounds for GSA Schedule Federal Construction Contractors

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    Break out the Neon: ‘80s Era Davis-Bacon “Prevailing Wage” Definition Restored in DOL Final Rule

    WARN Act Exceptions in Response to COVID-19

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts

    The “Program Accessibility” Exception for Public Entities Under the ADA

    In UK, 16th Century Abbey Modernizes Heating System by Going Back to Roman Times

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    Before and After the Storm: Know Your Insurance Rights, Coverages and Obligations

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    Hiring Subcontractors with Workers Compensation Insurance

    New Iowa Law Revises Construction Defects Statute of Repose

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    Louisiana Court Applies Manifestation Trigger to Affirm Denial of Coverage

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Sub-Contracted Electrical Company

    The Colorado Construction Defect Reform Act Explained

    AI and the Optimization of Construction Projects

    US Proposes Energy Efficiency Standards for Federal Buildings

    Mexico Settles With Contractors for Canceled Airport Terminal

    Ninth Circuit Upholds Corps’ Issuance of CWA Section 404 Permit for Newhall Ranch Project Near Santa Clarita, CA

    Illinois Supreme Court Announces Time Standards for Closing Out Cases

    Insureds Survive Summary Judgment on Coverage for Hurricane Loss
    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

    Bad Faith and a Partial Summary Judgment in Seattle Construction Defect Case

    February 10, 2012 —

    The US District Court of Washington has issued a ruling in the case of Ledcor Industries v. Virginia Surety Company, Inc. Ledcor was the builder of a mixed-use real estate project in Seattle called the Adelaide Project. Ledcor purchased an insurance policy from Virginia Surety covering the project. After the completion of the project, Ledcor received complaints of construction defects from the homeowners, which they forwarded to Virginia Surety.

    Virginia Surety denied coverage on several grounds. Absent any lawsuit, Virginia claimed that there was “not yet any duty to defend or indemnify.” Further, as the policy commenced ten days after work on the project was substantially completed, Virginia cited a provision in the policy that excluded coverage for damage that occurred before the policy began. As problems included water intrusion, Virginia noted an exclusion for fungal damage. Finally, Virginia noted that it was not clear whether damage was due to Ledcor’s own actions.

    The homeowners sued over the construction defects. Ledcor settled these suits before trial. In this, they were defended by, and settlements were paid by American Home, another of Ledcor’s insurers. Ledcor claims that Virginia Surety acted in bad faith by denying coverage and by its failure to investigate the ongoing nature of the work at the project.

    The judge determined that Virginia Surety acted in bad faith when it invoked the fungus exclusion. Virginia noted that fungal damage “‘would have been’ referenced in the list of construction defects,” however, the HOAs claimed only “water stains” and “water damage,” and made no mention of mold or fungus. The court found that Virginia Surety “was not entitled to deny coverage simply because it may have suspected that mold or fungus damage existed.” The court noted that further proceedings would be needed to determine what portion of the settlement Virginia is obligated to pay.

    The court found that there were matters of fact to be determined on the further issues in the case. The judge wrote that although Virginia acted in bad faith in invoking the fungus exclusion, it still had to be determined if they were in breach of contract by failing to defend Ledcor. Ledcor still needs to show that the damages claimed by the HOA were due to work actually covered by Virginia Surety.

    Ledcor made an additional claim that Virginia Surety violated Washington’s laws concerning the insurance industry. Here, the court noted that the improper exclusion for fungus issues “constitutes a per se unfair trade practice.” Six other claims were made under this law. The court found that Virginia Surety did not misrepresent “pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions.” It also issued its denial letter promptly, satisfying the fifth provision. However, Virginia Surety did violate the second provision, in that it failed “to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims.” Two other issues could not be determined.

    Judge Martinez’s decision granted a summary judgment to Ledcor on the issue of bad faith. An additional summary judgment was granted that Virginia Surety violated Washington’s Insurance Fair Conduct Act. Judge Martinez did not grant summary judgment on any of the other issues Ledcor raised.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    ABC Chapter President Comments on Miami Condo Collapse

    July 11, 2021 —
    Peter Dyga, ABC Florida East Coast Chapter president, has been one of the go-to experts in the aftermath of the shocking collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside, Florida. As of publication, the death toll stands at 46 people and another 94 remain unaccounted for. On July 7, rescue officials announced the search would transition to a recovery operation at midnight on July 8, following the demolition of the remaining building over the July 4 weekend. Dyga sat down with Construction Executive to discuss the critical nature of this tragedy and to review potential next steps. Construction Executive: This incident has become national news. Why do you think the building collapse has garnered so much attention? Peter Dyga: Because of the enormity of the tragedy and because it’s so uncommon for a building to collapse on its own. Reprinted courtesy of Rachel O'Connell, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Jury Verdict Reversed After Improper Trial Tactics

    October 09, 2018 —
    The appellate court reversed a jury verdict for the insured due to improper trial tactics by his attorney. Homeowners Choice Property and Cas. Ins. Co., Inc. v. Kuwas, 2018 Fla. Ct. App. LEXIS 9500 (Fla. Ct. App. July 5, 2018). The insured sued Homeowners Choice (HCI) alleging breach of contract due to a denial of coverage for property damage as a result of water loss. During the trial, HCI raised objections to various questions posed by the insured's counsel during the testimony of HCI's litigation manager, as well as various closing arguments made by the insured. The jury entered a verdict for the insured for a substantial sum. HCI appealed. 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

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    August 19, 2015 —
    The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's award of summary judgment to the insurer after analyzing the known loss provision in the insured subcontractor's policy. Kaady v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10754 (9th Cir. June 25, 2015). The insured was awarded a subcontract to install manufactured stone at the residential project. The stone was affixed to the wall sheathing. The insured also wrapped deck posts with manufactured stone and installed masonry caps on the toe of the stone that was wrapped around the deck posts. After construction was completed, the insured was called back to the project to inspect cracks in the manufactured stone and masonry caps he installed. The insured told the general contractor that the cracks were likely due to settling. Three months after inspecting the cracks, the insured purchased a CGL policy from Mid-Continent. 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

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    May 20, 2019 —
    On the morning of last year’s Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse, when the engineer of record assured project team members that there were no safety risks related to cracks propagating across a part of the unusual single-truss structure, other project team members voiced mild concern, but no alarm. In hindsight, considering that the bridge had no inherent structural redundancy as it sat, incomplete, straddling a busy highway—and would suffer a sudden, catastrophic and deadly collapse just hours later—the team’s lack of urgency remains puzzling, say engineering experts contacted by ENR for comment. Reprinted courtesy of Scott Judy, ENR and Richard Korman, ENR Mr. Judy may be contacted at mailto:judys@enr.com Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Condo Owners Allege Construction Defects

    July 06, 2011 —

    Last November, mold problems were discovered at the Siena Condominiums in Montclair, New Jersey, which had been described by their developers as “an enclave of luxury in an urban village setting.” The owners have filed a lawsuit against Pinnacle Companies, Kohl Parnters, and Herod Development, seeking “compensatory damages, interest, reasonable attorney’s fee and costs, and for such other, further, and different relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

    According to the article on Baristanet.com, an engineering report commissioned by the condominium association revealed many problems, including improperly installed windows and siding. The developers commissioned two engineering reports themselves and found evidence of water pounding on the roof. Despite these reports and repeated promises, no repairs have been made.

    Read the full story…

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

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    October 21, 2013 —
    A school in Wales may have to close due to roof leaks. The school was opened six years ago, but since then the leaks at Ysgol Ffynnonbedr are “leading to the deterioration of the structure and fabric of the school.” The Lampeter city council have budgeted £35,000 (about $56,000) for repairs to the roof. The leaks have already rendered some of the electrical systems and teaching areas unusable. The city council had been in discussion with the builders, Cowlin Construction, when that firm was bought by Balfour Beatty. Balfour Beatty did not comment to the Cambrian Times about resolving the construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Claim over LAX Runways

    October 22, 2013 —
    The city of Los Angeles is claiming that problems with the south runway at Los Angeles International Airport are due to construction defects. The city as filed a lawsuit against four of the firms involved in building the runway, CH2M Hill, R&L Brosamer, HNTB, and Tutor-Saliba Corp. The lawsuit also includes the possibility of naming up to 200 individuals or corporations. The suit alleges that the firms incorrectly installed the concrete, leading to accelerated wear. As a result, renovation of the runway will likely have to be done earlier than anticipated. The runway was opened in 2007 as part of a safety improvement effort. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of