BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Builder and County Tussle over Unfinished Homes

    Despite Feds' Raised Bar, 2.8B Massachusetts Offshore Wind Project Presses On

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

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

    First-Time Buyers Home Sales Stagnates

    Judge Tells DOL to Cork its Pistol as New Overtime Rule is Blocked

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Idaho Business Review Names VF Law Attorney Brittaney Bones Women of the Year Honoree

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Fifteen White and Williams Lawyers

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Berger: FIGG Is Slow To Hand Over All Bridge Collapse Data

    Include Materials Price Escalation Clauses in Construction Clauses

    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Supports Coverage

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    Recent Bad Faith Decisions in Florida Raise Concerns

    Commercial Construction Lenders Rejoice: The Pennsylvania Legislature Provides a Statutory fix for the “Kessler” Decision

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Endorsements in CGL Insurance Policies: A Word of Caution

    World's Longest Suspension Bridge Takes Shape in Turkey

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

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

    Changing Course Midstream Did Not Work in River Dredging Project

    COVID-19 Response: Executive Order 13999: Enhancement of COVID-19-Related Workplace Safety Requirements

    Comply with your Insurance Policy's Conditions Precedent (Post-Loss Obligations)

    Measures Landlords and Property Managers Can Take in Response to a Reported COVID-19 Infection

    No Coverage for Defects in Subcontrator's Own Work

    New Report: Civil Engineering Salaries and Job Satisfaction Are Strong and Climbing at a Faster Rate Than Past Reports

    Point Taken: The UK Supreme Court Finally Confirms the General Law of Liquidated Damages (LDs)

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    Implied Warranties for Infrastructure in Florida Construction Defect Claims

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    Florida Governor Signs COVID-19 Liability Shield

    Concerns Over Unstable Tappan Zee Bridge Push Back Opening of New NY Bridge's Second Span

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant

    David McLain Recognized Among the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law

    Triable Issue of Fact Exists as to Insurer’s Obligation to Provide Coverage Under Occurrence Policy

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Colorado Requires Builders to Accommodate High-Efficiency Devices in New Homes

    Manhattan Home Sales Rise at Slower Pace as Prices Jump

    Construction Continues To Boom Across The South

    Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien “Waivers” and “Releases”: What’s the Difference?

    New Jersey Supreme Court Hears Insurers’ Bid to Overturn a $400M Decision

    Coverage Issues: When You Need Your Own Lawyer in a Construction Defect Suit

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Reminder: The Devil is in the Mechanic’s Lien Details

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Claim

    BOO! Running From Chainsaw Wielding Actor then Falling is an Inherent Risk of a Haunted Attraction

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill
    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

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    July 19, 2017 —
    Governor Brown Signs Legislation Increasing Cal/OSHA Fines Cal/OSHA has increased its maximum fines for the first time in more than twenty years pursuant to legislation recently signed into law by Governor Brown. The changes nearly double the maximum fines and have brought California in line with the Federal standard. The increase in fines will not be isolated to this year, as fines will now be automatically increased annually based on the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). Additionally, any employer who repeatedly violates any occupational safety or health standard, order, or special order, or Section 25910 of the Health and Safety Code, can no longer receive any adjustment of a penalty assessed based on the good faith or the history of previous violations. Such adjustments were previously commonplace.
      Specific increases are listed below (all increases refer to maximum fines, Cal/OSHA has discretion as to the amount of the fine when issuing the citation):
    • Section 6427 of the Labor Code was amended to increase fines, not of a serious nature, from $7,000 for each violation to $12,471 for each violation.
    • Section 6429 of the Labor Code has increased fines for repeat violations; raising the maximum fine from $70,000 to $124,709 for each violation. Additionally, Section 6429 also raised the minimum fine for repeat violations from $5,000 to $8,908.
    • Section 6431 raised fines for posting or recordkeeping violations from $7,000 to $12,471 per violation.
    Full text of the penalty section of the labor code may be found here California OSHA Emergency Action Plan elements revised; California now more consistent with Federal Standards Revisions to General Safety Orders section 3220(b) became effective on June 5, 2017 and contain two minor changes for California employers with regards to Emergency Action Plans (EAP). The first change requires that an employer’s EAP be more detailed in describing the type of evacuation that is to be performed, not just the route for an evacuation. The previous element of the EAP simply required that the plan contain, “[e]mergency escape procedures and emergency escape route assignments.” The current element of the EAP requires that, “[p]rocedures for emergency evacuation, including type of evacuation and exit route assignments,” be identified. The second change clarifies the language surrounding employees performing rescue or medical duties. Previously the only requirement in the EAP regarding rescue and medical duties was for employees that performed rescue and medical duties. The current version requires that the EAP contain, “[p]rocedures to be followed by employees performing rescue or medical duties. The use of the word and created potential gaps in plans as it is likely that employees may not be performing both rescue and medical duties, instead performing just rescue or medical duties. Plans must now include procedures to be followed by employees who perform either rescue or medical duties. It is recommended that your EAP be in writing and updated to comply with the revised General Safety Orders section 3220. The full text of General Safety Orders section 3320 can be seen here. Please contact us if you would like further details regarding your Emergency Action Plan. Deadline for Electronic Submission of OSHA 300 Log Records for Injuries and Illnesses Delayed On May 12, 2016, the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a rule entitled “Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses” which required certain employers subject to Federal OSHA regulations to submit the information from their completed 2016 Form 300A to OSHA via electronic submission no later than July 1, 2017. On June 28, 2017, OSHA, via a Notice of Proposed Rule Making, has proposed a December 1, 2017 deadline for the electronic reporting; the electronic reporting system is scheduled to be available on August 1, 2017. Per the California Department of Industrial Relations, California employers are not required to follow the new requirements and will not be required to do so until "substantially similar" regulations go through formal rulemaking, which would culminate in adoption by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations and approval by the Office of Administrative Law. Cal/OSHA drafted a proposed rulemaking package to conform to the revised federal OSHA regulations by amending the California Code of Regulations, title 8, sections 14300.35, 14300.36, and 14300.41; these are currently under review with the State. It is currently unclear what, if any, impact the delay by OSHA will have on the proposed amendments to the California Code. We will keep you posted as to the changes in California recordkeeping requirements. Please contact Louis “Dutch” Schotemeyer with any questions regarding Cal OSHA or your safety program. Dutch is located at Newmeyer & Dillion’s Newport Beach office and can be reached at dutch.schotemeyer@ndlf.com or by calling 949.271.7208. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A New Statute of Limitations on Construction Claims by VA State Agencies?

    March 27, 2019 —
    I have discussed the Hensel Phelps case and the potential issues caused by both poorly drafted indemnity clauses and the lack of a statute of limitations applicable to the Commonwealth of Virginia and its agencies in 2017. New legislation (supported by various contractor groups including my friends at the AGC of Virginia) has been proposed for the 2019 General Assembly session that seeks to address at least part of this issue. While the indemnity provisions of your construction contracts can be addressed by careful drafting with the help of an experienced construction attorney, the proposed legislation (found in HB1667) seeks to address the statute of limitations issue. The proposed legislation is described as follows:
    Provides that no action may be brought by a public body on any construction contract, including construction management and design-build contracts, unless such action is brought within five years after substantial completion of the work on the project and that no action may be brought by a public body on a warranty or guarantee in such construction contract more than one year from the breach of that warranty, but in no event more than one year after the expiration of such warranty or guarantee. The bill also limits the time frame during which a public body, other than the Department of Transportation, may bring an action against a surety on a performance bond to within one year after substantial completion of the work on the project.
    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

    NYC’s Developers Plow Ahead With Ambitious Plans to Reshape City

    May 03, 2021 —
    New York City’s builders have had a curious reaction to a pandemic that emptied Manhattan’s office towers, shuttered restaurants and kept tourists home. Over the past year, as scores of businesses closed and many residents beat it out of town, developers doubled-down on visions of steel-and-glass grandeur, hatching plans that could transform the city. Vornado Realty Trust recently said it will demolish the Hotel Pennsylvania and add an office tower taller than 1,200 feet (366 meters) at the site by Madison Square Garden. Near Grand Central Terminal, giant towers are sprouting, including a project to redevelop the Grand Hyatt next to the transit hub. The developers are proposing a 1,600-foot skyscraper that would be among the tallest in the Western Hemisphere. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick Clark & Natalie Wong, Bloomberg

    The Trend in the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Defect Litigation

    January 14, 2015 —
    Heather Howell Wright of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, analyzed the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision in Wyman v. Ayer Properties, LLC, which ruled that the “economic loss rule is not applicable to the damage caused to the common areas of a condominium building as a result of the builder’s negligence.” Wright compared Wyman to last year’s Florida Supreme Court case, Tiara Condominium Association v. Marsh & McLennan Companies that decided “that the economic loss rule did not preclude a condominium association from asserting a negligence claim against a contractor for defective work.” Wright concluded that “[t]he Wyman decision is another ruling in a growing line of cases where courts have limited application of the economic loss rule and have held that a contractor can be liable in tort for defective work.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    August 20, 2018 —
    Two U.S. Supreme Court rulings on June 27 that wrapped the court’s current case calendar addressed labor relations and water rights issues with construction sector impact. Its 5-4 decision in Janus v. AFSCME that public-sector employees can’t be forced to pay “fair-share fees” to unions could affect industry professionals represented by labor groups in 22 states. Reprinted courtesy of ENR journalists Jeff Yoders, Pam Radtke Russell, JT Long and Debra K. Rubin Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com Ms. Russell may be contacted at Russellp@bnpmedia.com Ms. Debra may be contacted at rubind@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    At Least 46 Killed in Taiwanese Apartment Building Inferno

    November 01, 2021 —
    Kaohsiung, Taiwan (AP) -- At least 46 people were killed and another 41 injured after a fire broke out early Thursday in a run-down mixed commercial and residential building in the Taiwanese port city of Kaohsiung, officials said. Neighborhood residents said the 13-story building was home to many poor, elderly and disabled people and it wasn’t clear how many of the 120 units were occupied. Witnesses said they heard something that sounded like an explosion at about 3 a.m. when the blaze erupted in the building's lower floors, which housed a closed movie theater, abandoned restaurants and karaoke clubs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    November 15, 2022 —
    Three real estate companies operating in Washington, DC, will pay record-breaking penalties in a suit brought by the city for illegally discriminating against tenants who use Section 8 vouchers and other forms of housing assistance. The attorney general for the District of Columbia, Karl Racine, announced on Thursday a settlement for $10 million. While fair housing cases involving lenders have resulted in larger compensation payouts, $10 million is the largest civil penalty ever levied in a housing discrimination case. In 2020, the city sued several entities — DARO Management Services, DARO Realty and New York-based parent company Infinity Real Estate, as well as several executives — over housing practices in the District. DARO Management operates and rents some 1,200 residential units in more than a dozen apartment buildings spread across Wards 1, 2 and 3, which include DC’s more affluent areas. (DARO Realty owns the properties, DARO Management operates them, and Infinity owns both affiliates.) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    December 30, 2015 —
    Scott Calkins and Anthony Gaeta of Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli, LLP obtained a defense verdict in a breach of fiduciary duty action involving a high-rise condominium in downtown San Diego, California. The Association asked for excess of over $3 million, however, the jury returned with a 10-2 defense verdict in favor of K. Hovnanian. “While it is now becoming ever more common for attorneys representing homeowners associations to allege a breach of fiduciary duty by the developer, there has been little actual litigation of the issues surrounding those claims which test the viability of the allegations or the defenses to them,” defense attorney Anthony Gaeta stated. “A breach of a fiduciary duty by a developer, which is demonstrated to damage the viability of an HOA either to perform regularly scheduled maintenance, or replace building components from its reserves, has the potential in economic terms to surpass the damages from purported construction defects.” Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of