BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing 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


    Ohio: Are Construction Defects Covered in Insurance Policies?

    Professor Senet’s List of 25 Decisions Every California Construction Lawyer Should Know:

    Bert Hummel Appointed to Chief Justice’s Commission on Professionalism

    Congratulations to Wilke Fleury’s 2023 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars!!

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    Exclusions Bar Coverage for Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    Manhattan Home Prices Top Pre-Crisis Record on Luxury Deals

    Addressing Safety on the Construction Site

    Workers Hurt in Casino Floor Collapse

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/06/22

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    The Miller Act Explained

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking in The U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® as “Best Law Firms”!

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Judge Halts Sale of Brazilian Plywood

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    Pending Home Sales in U.S. Increase Less Than Forecast

    Alabama Court Determines No Coverage For Insured's Faulty Workmanship

    Unpaid Subcontractor Walks Off the Job and Wins

    The Latest News on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

    Constructive Notice Established as Obstacle to Relation Back Doctrine

    Dallas Condo Project to Expand

    Sometimes You Get Away with Default (but don’t count on it)

    Differences in Types of Damages Matter

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    EEOC Chair Issues New Report “Building for the Future: Advancing Equal Employment Opportunity in the Construction Industry”

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Insured Entitled to Defense After Posting Medical Records Online

    Construction Project Bankruptcy Law

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    Disruption: When Did It Start and Where Will It End?

    Tech Focus: Water Tech Getting Smarter

    Courts Take Another Swipe at the Implied Warranty of the Plans and Specifications

    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Economic Waste Doctrine and Construction Defects / Nonconforming Work

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

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

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    Revised Federal Rule Regarding Class-Wide Settlements

    Maine Court Allows $1B Hydropower Transmission Project to Proceed

    Singer Ordered to Deposition in Construction Defect Case
    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

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

    April 27, 2020 —
    This Alert explores the contract provisions and related rights that are likely to govern time and compensation adjustments for COVID-19 impacts. As parties begin analyzing such rights, this is intended to serve as a useful guide and checklist. Analysis of relevant contract provisions should start with careful consideration of the specific impacts that have been experienced and the causes of those impacts. The nature of the impact (delay, extra work, disruption, etc.) and the causes of such impacts (owner direction, government order, etc.) will generally govern the analysis and resulting course of action. Listing or creating a matrix of impacts and their causes may be an effective working tool. Essentially, there are five primary impacts that will likely require critical analysis under the relevant contract provisions, and notably, more than one impact may be present: a) complete or partial suspension of work, b) additional work or requirements, c) added cost, d) delay, and e) disruption. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick J. Greene, Jr., Peckar & Abramson
    Mr. Greene may be contacted at pgreene@pecklaw.com

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    July 20, 2020 —
    On June 5, 2020, President Trump signed into legislation the bipartisan bill titled the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 (PPPFA). The PPPFA modifies the Paycheck Protection Program, which was first introduced under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act). The modifications provide borrowers more control over the use of funds and make it easier to obtain forgiveness. The following is a summary of the key changes. 1. Extended Maturity Date From 2 Years to 5 Years Under the CARES Act, the minimum maturity date for loan amounts after the forgiveness period was not defined. The Small Business Administration (SBA) then released an Interim Final Rule clarifying that the minimum maturity date was two years. The PPPFA has extended the term to five years: “The covered loan shall have a minimum maturity of 5 years and a maximum maturity of 10 years from the date on which the borrower applies for loan forgiveness under that section.” 2. Extension of Covered Period From Eight Weeks to a Maximum of 24 Weeks Under the CARES Act, the covered period of the loan (i.e., the time period in which you may spend the loan funds) was February 15, 2020 to June 30, 2020, an eight-week period. The PPPFA extended the covered period to 24 weeks from the origination date of the loan, or December 31, 2020, whichever is earlier. Reprinted courtesy of Amy R. Patton, Payne & Fears and Rana Ayazi, Payne & Fears Ms. Patton may be contacted at arp@paynefears.com Ms. Ayazi may be contacted at ra@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    October 04, 2021 —
    If you suffered damage as a result of a hurricane, you should submit a claim under any insurance policy you have that might apply. This includes:
    • Flood insurance
    • Homeowner’s insurance
    • Renter’s insurance
    • Condo insurance
    • Auto insurance
    Steps for Handling Your Hurricane Insurance Claim
    1. Submit Your Claim. As soon as possible, provide a written notice of claim to your insurer according to the notice provision of your policy. Keep a copy for your records. If you don’t have a copy of your policy, call the insurance company, ask them how to submit your claim, and request a copy of your policy.
    Reprinted courtesy of Kelly A. Johnson, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and Gregory D. Podolak, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Ms. Johnson may be contacted at KJohnson@sdvlaw.com Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at SGiagnorio@sdvlaw.com Mr. Podolak may be contacted at GPodolak@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    NJ Condo Construction Defect Case Dismissed over Statute of Limitations

    June 11, 2014 —
    According to an article by Matthew D. Stockwell of the firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP published in Lexology, “a trial court in Bergen County, New Jersey dismissed a condominium association's construction defect claims against several construction entities for failure to comply with the applicable statute of limitations.” Stockwell stated that the “aftermath will be interesting to follow, because the trial court stripped away some of the protection that New Jersey's discovery rule affords to property owners who become aware of latent defects well after a project is substantially completed.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mortgage Interest Rates Increase on Newly Built Homes

    April 30, 2014 —
    According to the National Association of Home Builders’ (NAHB) Eye on Housing, while the Federal Housing Financing Agency (FHFA) reported a decrease in mortgage interest rates for existing homes, there was an increase in mortgage rates on newly built homes: “The average contract interest rate on conventional mortgages used to purchase newly built homes actually increased in March, from 3.91 to 4.21 percent, reversing an anomalous drop to under 4 percent that occurred in February.” “The average price and loan size on conventional mortgages used to purchase newly built homes also reversed previous month declines in March,” reported Eye on Housing. “The average price increased 5.4 percent to $427,200—the second highest number on record.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Defense Victory in Breach of Fiduciary Action

    February 26, 2015 —
    Earlier this month, 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. Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al. initially involved construction defect claims against the developer, K. Hovnanian, and the general contractor, Turner Construction, as well as a claim of breach of fiduciary duty. However, the construction defect claims settled prior to trial leaving only the breach of fiduciary claim. “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. The Plaintiff argued that K. Hovnanian breached its fiduciary duty to the Association by failing to set adequate reserves within the initial Department of Real Estate budget (“DRE”) for painting, caulking, and power washing the exterior of the building, referencing Raven’s Cove Townhomes, Inc. v. Knuppe Development Co., Inc. (1981) 114 Cal. App. 3d 783. In response, K. Hovnanian stated that in part, the initial reserves as set forth in the DRE budget were adequate, good faith estimates and, therefore, there was no liability for breach of fiduciary duty. “Our case was exclusively concerned with the duties of the developer when forming the initial HOA, preliminary budgets, and reserves,” Gaeta said. “We litigated the duties and responsibilities of the initial board and whether a developer may rely on reports prepared by third-parties during the formation of a common interest development. The jury found our client’s actions and reliance on third-parties was reasonable and, thus, no breach of fiduciary duty occurred.” Collinsworth, Specht, Calkins & Giampaoli is a general civil litigation firm representing clients throughout California and Arizona. You may learn more about the firm at www.cslawoffices.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Denial of Motion to Dissolve Lis Pendens Does Not Automatically Create Basis for Certiorari Relief

    November 16, 2023 —
    A recent appellate decision out of Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal holds that a trial court’s denial of motion to dissolve a lis pendens does NOT automatically give a basis for a petition for a writ of certiorari. Generalized allegations of “irreparable harm” to support the basis for the petition for writ of certiorari are insufficient. Rather, the party moving for the petition MUST clearly demonstrate the irreparable harm; otherwise, the petition for writ of certiorari will fail. A lis pendens has legal significance. It is a recorded document that notifies the world that there is a pending lawsuit dealing with the real property at issue. This is important because who wants to buy a piece of property that is subject to litigation – that would be a risky transaction! In CPPB, LLC v. Taurus Apopka City Center, LLC, 48 Fla.L.Weekly D1837a (Fla. 6th DCA 2023), a dispute arose as to a real estate transaction. The owner sold a parcel to a buyer. The owner also owned three adjacent parcels. As part of the transaction, the buyer agreed to perform certain improvements to all of the parcels including those adjacent parcels owned by the owner. The owner deposited funds in escrow for purposes of its share of the improvements. A payment dispute arose regarding the improvements and the buyer sued the seller. The seller filed a counterclaim to rescind the transaction along with a recorded lis pendens on the parcel purchased by the buyer. The buyer moved to dissolve the lis pendens which the trial court denied. This prompted the appeal – a petition for a write of certiorari based on the trial court’s denial of the motion to dissolve the lis pendens. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Think Before you Execute that Release – the Language in the Release Matters!

    June 17, 2024 —
    If you execute a release in exchange for payment or other consideration, remember the language in the release means something. THE RELEASE LANGUAGE MATTERS! And the meaning in the release may be way more than you intended so please make sure you truly digest and consider release language before executing. This sentiment could not be truer than in the 2009 decision Bell BCI Company v. United States, 570 F.3d 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2009). In this case, a contractor entered into a modification (change order) with the government. The modification included the following language: increase the contract amount by $2,296,963 … as full and equitable adjustment for the remaining direct and indirect costs of the Floor 4 Fit-out (EWO 240–R1) and full and equitable adjustment for all delays resulting from any and all Government changes transmitted to the Contractor on or before August 31, 2000. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com