BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    Boston Developer Sues Contractor Alleging Delays That Cost Millions

    Who is Responsible for Construction Defect Repairs?

    Insurer in Bad Faith Due to Adjuster's Failure to Keep Abreast of Case Law

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    Pass-Through Subcontractor Claims, Liquidating Agreements, and Avoiding a Two-Front War

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    New York Shuts Down Majority of Construction

    Release Language Extended To Successor Entity But Only Covered “Known” Claims

    Park Avenue Is About to Get Something It Hasn’t Seen in 40 Years

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO

    Mechanic’s Liens and Leases Don’t Often Mix Well

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence

    Renovation Makes Old Arena Feel Brand New

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to Best Lawyers in America© Orange County and as Attorneys of the Year 2018

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

    Tenants Who Negligently Cause Fires in Florida Beware: You May Be Liable to the Landlord’s Insurer

    The Impact of Sopris Lodging v. Schofield Excavation on Timeliness of Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    School District Client Advisory: Civility is not an Option, It is a Duty

    To Bee or Not to Bee - CA Court Finds Denial of Coverage Based on Exclusion was Premature Where Facts had not been Judicially Determined

    Australian Developer Denies Building Problems Due to Construction Defects

    Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Pennsylvania Payment Act

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    Extreme Heat, Smoke Should Get US Disaster Label, Groups Say

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    NYC Rail Tunnel Cost Jumps and Construction Start Pushed Back

    Factor the Factor in Factoring

    Watch Your Step – Playing Golf on an Outdoor Course Necessarily Encompasses Risk of Encountering Irregularities in the Ground Surface

    What I Love and Hate About Updating My Contracts From an Owners’ Perspective

    Unpunished Racist Taunts: A Pennsylvania Harassment Case With No True 'Winner'

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    And the Cyber-Beat Goes On. Yet Another Cyber Regulatory Focus for Insurers

    How to Challenge a Project Labor Agreement

    When an Insurer Proceeds as Subrogee, Defendants Cannot Assert Contribution Claims Against the Insured

    Solutions To 4 Common Law Firm Diversity Challenges

    UK's Biggest Construction Show Bans 'Promo Girls'

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Be Careful with Mechanic’s Lien Waivers

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    London Shard Developer Wins Approval for Tower Nearby

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    Lockton Expands Construction and Design Team

    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    July 30, 2014 —
    According to Insurance News, The Greeneview School Board will be meeting with contractor Sfaffco Construction Inc. to discuss findings in a 122-page report produced by “Mays Consulting & Evaluation Services Inc. that outlines numerous alleged construction defects in the roofing system.” "It's really the first time we have everybody together to discuss the deficiencies," said Isaac Seevers, the Greeneview Local Schools superintendent told Insurance News. The school board estimates that the alleged problems will take up to $3.5 million to fix. Meanwhile, Staffco has hired their own consultant. "The report from Mays is one sided," Staffco President Jon Stafford said according to Insurance News. "We take issue with some of the findings in there." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms Eight-Year Limit on Construction Defect Lawsuits

    July 18, 2011 —

    Acting on the case of Albano v. Shea Homes Ltd. Partnership, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that Arizona’s eight-year statute of repose applies. The case was referred to the court by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which had asked for a clarification of Arizona law. The case focused on three questions:

    1. Does the filing of a motion for class certification in an Arizona court toll the statute of limitations for individuals, who are included within the class, to file individual causes of action involving the same defendants and the same subject matter? 2. If so, does this class-action tolling doctrine apply to statutes of repose, and more specifically, to the statute of repose for construction defects set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") § 12-552? 3. If the doctrine applies to statutes of repose, and specifically § 12-552, may a court weigh the equities of the case in determining whether, and to what extent, an action is tolled?

    The litigation at hand has a lengthy history, starting with a case referred to as “Hoffman” in 2003. The Albano plaintiffs were not able to join in Hoffman, and they filed their own lawsuit in 2006. An additional lawsuit was filed by the Albano plaintiffs in 2007. The courts decided that the Albano plaintiffs’ lawsuit was untimely.

    The Arizona Supreme Court concluded that the statute of repose was the appropriate standard for this case. They noted that “the eight-year statute of repose period began to run on November 6, 1997, the date of the Town of Gilbert’s final inspection. Albano II was filed on November 5, 2007.”

    The court found that the plaintiffs had waited too long for start their suit. As a result, they found it unnecessary to answer the first or third questions. Justice A. John Pelander of the Arizona Supreme Court wrote the opinion, dated June 30, 2011.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Not Just Another Client Alert about Cyber-Risk and Effective Cybersecurity Insurance Regulatory Guidance

    April 01, 2015 —
    The prefix "cyber" was coined about 70 years ago to describe early stage computers, computer networks and virtual reality. Since then, the term has been used as a prefix for hundreds of words, however, the most recent (and newsworthy) usage is its link to the word “risk” and the correlative term “security.” Two sides of the same coin and not a day goes by when a data breach is not reported and the importance of cyber risk and cybersecurity underscored. Insurers, like other financial institutions, are at the forefront of the “cyber-curve.” Many insurers are particularly vulnerable on at least two fronts: (1) from a cyber risk/ cyber invasion perspective and; (2) an insurer’s insurance policy exposure, intentional and not, to third-parties under cyber policies, and even policies such as CGLs that may inadvertently cover such risks. A number of federal and state regulators have spoken to this issue in an effort to address cyber risks with varying degrees of specificity. At last count, in addition to a myriad of existing and proposed state laws and regulations, there are at least nine federal Bills under consideration by Congress (covering six federal agencies including one new agency) that seek to impose regulatory requirements upon the cyber-arena. Those Bills empower six regulatory agencies; including one new agency. Initially, some states required companies to notify affected persons of a data breach. As breaches became more serious, state and federal regulators sought to increase the industry’s awareness of the potential exposures and provided instructions on appropriate steps to protect data from cyber invasions. Now, state insurance regulators are examining not only the threat of data theft, but the balance sheet impact of insurance exposures for underwriting such risks for third-parties’ under cyber risk policies. The regulatory efforts continue to multiply in an effort to stem some of these risks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert Ansehl, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Ansehl may be contacted at ansehlr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 01/26/22

    February 07, 2022 —
    The future of traditional real estate skills for virtual land buys is questioned, China’s property sector might experience policy easing, U.S. commercial real estate sales set records in 2021, and more.
    • As the platforms and business case for virtual land buys mature, the future of traditional real estate skills remains unclear when it comes to managing virtual ownership and development. (Patrick Sisson, Bisnow)
    • China’s real estate sector is likely to see “significant easing” in the policies that govern it after stricter financing rules for property development set in 2020 were met with debt, causing a contraction in the market. (Reuters)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Michigan Finds Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Work

    August 24, 2020 —
    The Michigan Supreme Court held that under a CGL policy, an "accident" may include unintentional subcontractor work that damages the insured's work product. Skanska USA Building Inc. v. M.A.P. Mechanical Contractors, Inc., et al., 2020 Mich. LEXIS 1194 (Mich. June 29, 2020). Skanska USA Building Inc. was the construction manager on a renovation project for a medical centre. The heatng and cooling portion of the project was subcontracted to M.A.P. Mechanical Contractors, Inc. (MAP). MAP installed a steam builder and piping for the heating system. The installation included several expansion joints. After completion, Skanska learned that MAP had installed some of the expansion joints backward. This caused significant damage to concrete, steel and the heating system. The medical center sent a demand letter to Skanska, who send a demand letter to MAP. Skanska did the repairs and replacement of the damaged property. Skanska then submitted a claim of $1.4 million for its work to Amerisure Insurance Company. The claim was denied. 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

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    November 02, 2020 —
    Today, many cities in different countries have high-rise buildings or more popularly known as skyscrapers. The concept of skyscraper was first used to define the more than 137-foot-high buildings constructed in Chicago in 1885. It is generally defined as one that is taller than the maximum height that requires mechanical vertical transportation for people. Usually, these buildings only have limited uses and are primarily focused on functioning as residential apartments, hotels and office buildings, though they occasionally include retail and educational facilities. Because high-rise buildings are among the largest buildings built, it is necessary that their commercial and office functions require a high degree of flexibility. That’s why it is important for high-rise buildings to have structural systems or structural frames—the assembly of interrelated or interdependent elements that forms a complex structure. These structural systems are built and designed for resisting different loads. To further understand how structural systems work, take the human body as a comparison. If human bones are weak and not properly aligned, the human body as a whole will not be able to perform or work well. Structural systems, in the same way, would not be able to take loads if not built properly. After all, no one wants a toppling skyscraper. To give the readers more information about structural systems in high-rise buildings, this article will discuss some of them. Reprinted courtesy of Chris Jackson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Historical Long-Tail Claims in California Subject to a Vertical Exhaustion Rule

    December 03, 2024 —

    California’s complex saga of long-tail injury coverage under general liability policies took an interesting turn in the California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Truck Ins. Exch. v. Kaiser Cement.1 In Truck, the court made it clear that Insureds can access excess policy limits without first exhausting all triggered underlying primary coverage, provided the underlying limits for the same policy period have been exhausted.

    A Brief Summary of the History of Coverage for Long-Tail Claims in California2

    Understanding the contextual significance of Truck requires a brief survey of California’s gradually developed case law with respect to long-tail progressive injury and damage claims. A “long-tail claim” typically involves progressively manifesting damage, injury, or disease that develops over a period of multiple years. Because general liability insurance is traditionally triggered based on the timing of when bodily injury or property damage occurs, the progressive nature of these claims has led many courts to analyze when injury or damage occurs in these claims. In doing so, California courts have generally found that these injuries occur across numerous years, thereby triggering numerous policies.3

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Will S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at WBennett@sdvlaw.com

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

    April 11, 2018 —
    A friend came to me with a question regarding a case he was working: “can a public owner require that bidders use a specific brand name product?” “Of course not,” I said “proprietary specifications are illegal.” Or, at least that’s what I assumed. To my surprise, the law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is not as clear as it is in other jurisdictions. What is a proprietary specification? A proprietary specification lists a product by brand name, make, model and/model that a contractor must (shall) utilize in construction. A basic example of a proprietary specification would state:
    “Air Handlers shall be “Turbo Max” as manufactured by Chiller Corp.”
    There are two problems with a proprietary specification (other than potentially being illegal): (a) they limit competition, and (b) invite steered contract awards. They limit competition because it limits the type of material that can be used on the project. In the example above, there could be equivalent air handlers available at a better price but the contractor could not use that lower priced product in its bid. Thus, the taxpayers end up paying more for tile. Also, contractors may not be able to secure a certain brand name product because of exclusive distribution agreements. Again, using the example above, contractor A’s competitor may have the exclusive distribution agreement with Chiller Corp. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com