BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut civil engineer 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


    L.A.’s Modest Solution to the ‘Missing Middle’ Housing Problem

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    Patrick Haggerty Promoted to Counsel

    Federal Courts Reject Insurers’ Attempts to Recoup Defense Costs Expended Under Reservation of Rights

    Contractor Manslaughter? Safety Shortcuts Are Not Worth It

    Update: Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Construction Bidding for Success

    Specific Performance: Equitable Remedy to Enforce Affirmative Obligation

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    Home Builders Wear Many Hats

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    A Homeowner’s Subsequent Action is Barred as a Matter of Law by way of a Prior “Right to Repair Act” Claim Resolved by Cash Settlement for Waiver of all Known or Unknown Claims

    Court finds subcontractor responsible for defending claim

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/02/22) – Flexible Workspaces, Sustainable Infrastructure, & Construction Tech

    Defining Construction Defects

    Without Reservations: Fourth Circuit Affirms That Vague Reservation of Rights Waived Insurers’ Coverage Arguments

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    The Construction Industry Lost Jobs (No Surprise) but it Gained Some Too (Surprise)

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    Insured's Claim for Replacement Cost Denied

    Building Group Has Successful 2012, Looks to 2013

    London Penthouse Will Offer Chance to Look Down at Royalty

    White House Reverses Trump Administration NEPA Cutbacks

    Wendel Rosen Construction Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers

    Allegations that Carrier Failed to Adequately Investigate Survive Demurrer

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    The Privilege Is All Mine: California Appellate Court Finds Law Firm Holds Attorney Work Product Privilege Applicable to Documents Created by Formerly Employed Attorney

    Huh? Action on Construction Lien “Relates Back” Despite Notice of Contest of Lien

    What You Should Know About Liquidated Damages and Liability Caps for Delay and Performance Liquidated Damages

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    Why Builders Should Reconsider Arbitration Clauses in Construction Contracts

    URGENT: 'Catching Some Hell': Hurricane Michael Slams Into Florida

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    California’s Labor Enforcement Task Force Continues to Set Fire to the Underground Economy

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    Good Ole Duty to Defend

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    Two Things to Consider Before Making Warranty Repairs

    Failure to Consider Safety Element in Design Does Not Preclude Public Entity’s Discretionary Authority Under Design Immunity Defense

    Coverage Denied for Condominium Managing Agent

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/20/24) – Construction Backlog Falls, National Association of Realtors Settle Litigation, and Commercial Real Estate Market’s Effect on City Cuts

    Another Defect Found on the Bay Bridge: Water Leakage
    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

    Safe Commercial Asbestos-Removal Practices

    April 18, 2023 —
    Contractors must proceed with caution to safely remove asbestos and protect employees and commercial buildings. Only contractors licensed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in abatement should dispose of it, because the best asbestos-removal practices require high degrees of care and safety. Asbestos is a stealthy material, quickly becoming airborne and contaminating other areas of the building and humans. No matter a contractor's tenure in the field, it's vital to remember the top practices in the industry as people learn more about elusive, toxic asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). Wait for Technician and Inspector Feedback It’s important to find out if a jobsite contains asbestos. Proceed with caution if the structure was built before the 1990s. The removal process shouldn't start immediately if a business suspects asbestos and reaches out to a company. Inspectors scope the situation and grab samples for lab testing to determine how abaters should handle the case. They will need to know every potential hiding place for the asbestos, analyzing everything from caulking to wiring for asbestos coatings and other variants of the substance. This may take time, but commercial contractors must wait until they receive this information before proceeding. Reprinted courtesy of Emily Newton, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contract Change # 10: Differing Site Conditions (law note)

    March 28, 2018 —
    Previously, the A201 required a Contractor to provide notice to the Owner and Architect within 21 days after discovery of unforeseen site conditions. This notification is required prior to the conditions being disturbed, so as to allow the Design Team the ability to evaluate the site and determine the compensability of any such differing conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law in North Carolina

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    June 18, 2019 —
    Ordinance 52-19 became effective in April 2019 and expands upon existing San Francisco Building Code registration requirements for “Vacant or Abandoned” “Commercial Storefronts.” A storefront becomes “Vacant or Abandoned” once it has been unoccupied for 30 days (among other earlier triggers for blighted or unsecured storefronts). A “Commercial Storefront” is broadly defined as “any area within a building that may be individually leased or rented for any purpose other than Residential Use as defined in Planning Code.” (See § 103.A.5.1 of the San Francisco Building Code.) So, a building that is 97% leased could still contain a Vacant or Abandoned Commercial Storefront, which would technically require registration under the Building Code. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matt Olhausen, Pillsbury
    Mr. Olhausen may be contacted at matt.olhausen@pillsburylaw.com

    Colorado Homes Approved Despite being Too Close Together

    January 22, 2014 —
    ABC 7 reported that more than a dozen homes in Adams County, Colorado were inspected and approved by Building and Safety despite being built too close together. The problem was discovered by an inspector who cited a new home for being “4 inches too close to adjoining property.” Jim Williamette, the Adams County Chief Building Official told ABC 7, “It’s a fire issue for the separation of buildings.” The county may have solved the issue, according to ABC 7. Williamette stated that the properties “will be modified with fire-resistant windows” and combined with the “already-installed fire-resistant siding, the windows will satisfy the international building code.” Currently, the parties are in verbal agreement, and a “signed design proposal” is expected no later than January 21st. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    February 14, 2022 —
    Recently, Florida’s First District Court of Appeals handed down a victory for policyholders when it affirmed a Circuit Court’s order compelling an insurer to produce its underwriting manual in a breach of contract action. In People’s Trust Insurance Co. v. Foster, No. 1D21-845 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan. 26, 2022), the policyholder, Mr. Foster, filed a breach of contract claim against his insurer, People’s Trust, after People’s Trust failed to pay his insurance claim for damage caused to Mr. Foster’s home due to a leaking water pipe. People’s Trust denied Foster’s claim because “Foster’s pipe damage predated the policy’s inception.” During discovery Foster requested People’s Trusts’ underwriting manual(s) in effect at the time his policy was issued or renewed. People’s Trust objected to the request. In response, Foster filed a motion to compel production of the underwriting manual(s). After a hearing, the Circuit Court granted Foster’s motion and People’s Trust sought a writ of Certiorari from the First District Court of Appeal to quash the order compelling production. Reprinted courtesy of Andrea DeField, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Adriana A. Perez, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. DeField may be contacted at adefield@HuntonAK.com Ms. Perez may be contacted at pereza@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Equitable Subrogation Part Deux: Mechanic’s Lien vs. Later Bank Deed of Trust

    September 15, 2016 —
    This post follows, almost two years to the day, Rick Erickson’s post of August 29, 2014. As noted by Rick Erickson in his August 29, 2014 post, the Arizona Supreme Court in the Weitz case (2014) had determined that equitable subrogation principles were applicable to enable an earlier-recorded mechanic’s lien to be trumped by a later-recorded bank deed of trust, if the loan secured by the later deed of trust paid off a lien that had been ahead of the mechanic’s lien. In a decision filed August 9, 2016, the Arizona Court of Appeals further clarified the scope of such equitable subrogation. In Markham Contracting Co., Inc. v. FDIC, No. 1 CA-CV 14-0752 (August 9, 2016), the Arizona Court of Appeals addressed a situation where a first-recorded deed of trust was followed by a second-recorded mechanic’s lien; and then, after the mechanic’s lien was recorded, a new lender made a secured construction loan that was used, in part, to pay off the loan that was secured by the first-position deed of trust. The key being “in part.” The subsequent lender loaned $4.8 million, but only $2.9 million went to pay off the balance owing on the first-position deed of trust. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker – Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    September 04, 2018 —
    In Lexington Ins. Co. v. Chi. Flameproof & Wood Specialties Corp., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135871, 2018 WL 3819109 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 10, 2018), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois found that rip-and-tear costs could qualify as covered “property damage,” but the court rejected coverage for claims that the insured intentionally sold a noncompliant product as the suit did not allege an “occurrence.” Lexington Insurance Company (“Lexington”) issued a CGL policy to Chicago Flameproof & Wood Specialties Corp. (“Flameproof”). During the policy period, a third party ordered fire-retardant-treated lumber from Flameproof for construction in Minnesota. Flameproof instead sent materials that were not tested, certified, or labeled as compliant. The third party installed the materials, discovered the non-compliance, and then removed the materials. Removing the materials allegedly damaged other portions of the building on the project. The third party then sued Flameproof, alleging costs associated with replacing the lumber as well as property damage to the other materials from the removal of the lumber. Flameproof tendered the claim to Lexington seeking a defense. Lexington filed a declaratory action in the Northern District of Illinois. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Bassett, Traub Lieberman Strauss & Shrewsberry LLP
    Mr. Bassett may be contacted at bbassett@tlsslaw.com

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    March 16, 2017 —
    In 2002, the California State Legislature passed Senate Bill 800 also known as the Right to Repair Act (Civil Code Sections 895 et seq.) in an effort to stem a then rising tide in residential construction defect litigation. SB 800, which applies to newly constructed residential units including single-family homes and condominiums (but not condominium conversions) sold after January 1, 2003, was intended to curb residential construction defect lawsuits by giving developers and others in the construction chain an opportunity to repair construction defects before being sued in court. SB 800 also provides minimum construction standards and limits the time in which a homeowner can bring a claim for construction defects. In Acqua Vista Homeowners Association v. MWI, Case No. D068406 (January 26, 2017), the California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District examined the circumstances in which homeowners can sue a material supplier under the Right to Repair Act. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com