BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope 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


    A Special CDJ Thanksgiving Edition

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    ASCE Report Calls for Sweeping Changes to Texas Grid Infrastructure

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team on Obtaining a Defense Verdict in Favor of their Subcontractor Client!

    NY Court Holds Excess Liability Coverage Could Never be Triggered Where Employers’ Liability Policy Provided Unlimited Insurance Coverage

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    Washington Trial Court Narrows Definition of First Party Claimant, Clarifies Available Causes of Action in Commercial Property Loss Context

    Colorado SB 15-177 UPDATE: Senate Business, Labor, & Technology Committee Refers Construction Defect Reform Bill to Full Senate

    Contractor Underpaid Workers, Pocketed the Difference

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    Pacing in Construction Scheduling Disputes

    Ninth Circuit Reverses Grant of Summary Judgment to Insurer For Fortuitous Loss

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    UPDATE: ACS Obtains Additional $13.6 Million for General Contractor Client After $19.2 Million Jury Trial Victory

    UConn’s Law-School Library Construction Case Settled for Millions

    Ambiguity Kills in Construction Contracting

    Evaluating Smart Home Technology: It’s About More Than the Bottom Line

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims

    Hong Kong Popping Housing Bubbles London Can’t Handle

    Documentation Important for Defending Construction Defect Claims

    Nevada Supreme Court Declares Subcontractor Not Required to Provide Pre-Litigation Notice to Supplier

    Thank You for 14 Consecutive Years of Legal Elite Elections

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

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

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    China Construction Bank Sued in US Over Reinsurance Fraud Losses

    Contractor Wins in Arbitration Only to Lose Before the Superior Court on Section 7031 Claim

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    Texas Supreme Court to Review Eight-Corners Duty-to-Defend Rule

    Construction Workers Face Dangers on the Job

    Builder’s Be Wary of Insurance Policies that Provide No Coverage for Building: Mt. Hawley Ins. Co v. Creek Side at Parker HOA

    Formal Opinion No. 2020-203: How A Lawyer Is to Handle Access to Client Confidential Information and Anticipation of Potential Security Issues

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    State-Fed Fight Heats Up Over Building Private Nuclear Disposal Sites

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    Heathrow Speeds New-Runway Spending Before Construction Approval

    When to Withhold Retention Payments on Private or Public Projects

    Product Liability Economic Loss Rule and “Other Property” Damage

    It’s Not Just the Millennium Tower That’s Sinking in San Francisco

    How Will Today’s Pandemic Impact Tomorrow’s Construction Contracts?

    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    Boston Developer Sues Contractor Alleging Delays That Cost Millions

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

    How AI and Machine Learning Are Helping Construction Reduce Risk and Improve Margins

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case Cannot Be Overturned While Facts Are Still in Contention in Related Cases

    How Helsinki Airport Uses BIM to Create the Best Customer Experience
    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 Joins the EEOC in Analyzing Unsafe Construction Environments

    June 26, 2023 —
    Consistent with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP) published in January 2023, which noted an increased focus on the construction industry as it relates to harassment and discrimination issues within the workplace and around hiring and the advancement of minorities, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is following suit. At the end of March 2023, OSHA leaders announced another arrow in their quiver: OSHA has new authority through its Wage and Hour Division to issue certifications supporting applications for "U" nonimmigrant status and "T" nonimmigrant status visas. Reasoning that workers' immigration status, social inequalities or differences in culture can cause them to fear retaliation for identifying unsafe work environments and criminal activity, such as trafficking, murder, blackmail, extortion and other serious crimes, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, Doug Parker stated, "The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's top priority is to ensure workers are safe and can exercise their rights, regardless of their demographic or immigration status. A key part of that mission is expanding our work to combat workplace inequities that can create hazards and affect vulnerable workers who are likely to be exploited or victims of crimes. Our vision extends beyond setting standards, inspecting workplaces and providing training. Becoming a visa-certifying agency gives us one more tool in our wide-ranging efforts to better protect workers and their rights on the job." Reprinted courtesy of Cameron S. Hill Sr., Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Mr. Hill may be contacted at chill@bakerdonelson.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    August 27, 2014 —
    If you live in a major U.S. city and look out over the skyline, chances are good you’ll see construction cranes. Lots of them. Only twice in the past 25 years have new apartment buildings been going up as fast as they are right now. That’s not necessarily a good omen. The first time, in February 2000, was right before the dot-com bubble burst. The second time, January 2006, came right before the housing bubble burst. Now we learn that builders broke ground on 423,000 new multifamily units in July, right before … who knows what? Monthly building data released earlier this week by the Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development showed that new home construction overall posted strong gains in July, with the highest number of new home starts in eight months. The comeback largely manifested in an uptick in apartment buildings with five or more units, which saw an almost 50 percent increase in new starts in July over a year earlier. By comparison, starts on single-family homes were up only about 10 percent over the same period. That’s part of the reason that the Northeast, with its large, dense cities, saw the biggest monthly increase, up 44 percent from June. That matches the analysis by Trulia (TRLA) Chief Economist Jed Kolko, who found that among metro areas, Boston and New York are building more than in the past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen Weise, Bloomberg
    Ms. Weise may be contacted at kweise@bloomberg.net

    Shimmick Gets Nod for Second Pilot Pile at Settling Millennium Tower

    December 13, 2021 —
    After the successful installation of a 24-in.-dia permanent pilot pile at the troubled foundation upgrade of the settling Millennium Tower in San Francisco, the Dept. of Building Inspection (DBI) has given Shimmick Construction Co. permission to install a second pilot pile, beginning Dec. 1. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    July 13, 2020 —
    One of the most obvious and unavoidable results of the COVID-19 crisis has been the postponement of jury service and, by extension, all jury trials. Given the inherent difficulties of convening juries in a world of social distancing, it is likely that multiple jurisdictions will be unable to conduct live jury trials for at least the next several months. Recognizing the mounting delay and substantial docket backlog that is attendant to several months without jury trials, one court most recently permitted the litigants, upon consent, to try a new innovation – the nation’s first virtual jury trial conducted entirely on the Zoom platform. More than two dozen potential jurors in Collin County, Texas attended jury selection from home by smartphone, laptop, and tablet, a process that was streamed live on YouTube. The presiding judge occasionally provided prospective jurors technical advice on how to best use their devices. Once selected, the jurors virtually attended a one-day, “summary jury trial” of an insurance dispute in which they heard a condensed version of the case and delivered a non-binding verdict. The parties were then able to gauge how their cases would fare before a jury in a full-scale trial and, with that insight, agreed to proceed to a mediation in an attempt to reach a resolution. Court officials further touted the abbreviated, non-binding experience as an ideal test for the viability of remotely holding jury trials that would result in a final judgment. This real-world test, albeit in a non-binding exercise, may be an indication of things to come, as courts in Indiana and Arizona have already communicated an intention to conduct jury trials remotely once able. Reprinted courtesy of David R. Zaslow, White and Williams and Mark Paladino, White and Williams Mr. Zaslow may be contacted at zaslowd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Paladino may be contacted at paladinom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Court of Appeals Defines “Substantial Completion” for Subcontractors’ Work so as to Shorten the Period of Time in Which They Can Be Sued

    October 20, 2016 —
    Over the past few years, there has been a battle raging on in district courts and arbitration hearing rooms throughout Colorado regarding when a subcontractor’s work is to be deemed “substantially complete,” for purposes of triggering Colorado’s six-year statute of repose. C.R.S. § 13-80-104 states, in pertinent part:
    Notwithstanding any statutory provision to the contrary, all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of construction of any improvement to real property shall be brought within the time provided in section 13-80-102 after the claim for relief arises, and not thereafter, but in no case shall such an action be brought more than six years after the substantial completion of the improvement to the real property, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section. * * * (2) In case any such cause of action arises during the fifth or sixth year after substantial completion of the improvement to real property, said action shall be brought within two years after the date upon which said cause of action arises.
    C.R.S. § 13-80-104 (emphasis added). As the battle raged on at the trial court level, subcontractors and design professionals argued that their work should be deemed “substantially complete” when they finished their discrete scope of work within a project. Developers and general contractors, seeking to maintain third-party claims against the subcontractors and design professionals, typically argued either that the subcontractors’ and design professionals’ work should be deemed “substantially complete” upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy on the project, or upon the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for the last building within a project on which the subcontractor or design professional worked. Trial court judges and arbitrators have been split on this issue, with perhaps a slight majority favoring one or the other approaches advocated by developers and general contractors, that the subcontractors’ and design professionals’ work is “substantially complete” upon the issuance of the last certificate of occupancy in a project (the minority view) or upon the issuance of the last certificate of occupancy for the last building within a project on which the subcontractor of design professional worked (the majority view). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    A Year Later, Homeowners Still Repairing Damage from Sandy

    October 01, 2013 —
    The New York and New Jersey coastal communities are still in the thick of rebuilding and repairing after hurricane Sandy struck almost a year ago. Newsday reports that in the eight months following the October 2012 storm, more than 23,000 building permits were issued in Long Island communities, an 11 percent rise over the previous year. The town of Long Beach, New York has waived fees and hired more staff in order to encourage people to rebuild, in order to rebuild the town’s tax base. Homeowners aren’t going it alone, New York expects to fund more than $1 billion of rebuilding for homeowners who are unable to afford repairing their homes. At this point, the state is still processing more than five thousand requests for grants. The money is still in the state’s coffers. Other homeowners are still filing insurance claims. While towns are busy issuing building permits, contractors are busy too. Bill Sims of Sims Steel said that his business has changed from commercial construction to raising homes higher to put them above future floods. “There’s probably been more homes raised this last year than in the previous 20 years,” he told Newsday. Another contractor, Pat Gordon said that he is “only taking what we can handle.” He described Long Beach as “a traffic jam of construction trucks that has never been seen before.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hurricane Warning: Florida and Southeastern US Companies – It is Time to Activate Your Hurricane Preparedness Plan and Review Key Insurance Deadlines

    November 01, 2022 —
    Hurricane Ian is rapidly approaching the west coast of Florida and is expected to make landfall as a Category 4 hurricane near the Tampa area within the coming days. While the exact track is still being determined, there is a chance the storm may also impact insureds in Georgia and South Carolina. Now is the time to activate your disaster plan and ensure that you have your relevant insurance policies in your possession and that you review them for critical deadlines. We put together an alert here with tips to help you and your business mitigate potential storm loss and maximize coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Andrea DeField, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Walter J. Andrews, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Cary D. Steklof, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. DeField may be contacted at adefield@HuntonAK.com Mr. Andrews may be contacted at wandrews@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Steklof may be contacted at csteklof@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Roadway Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Driver Injured Outside of Construction Zone

    January 04, 2021 —
    For the roadway contractor it appeared to be an open and shut case: Plaintiff car driver was stopped at a standard one-way “reversing lane closure” traffic control in which traffic going in one direction would be stopped while traffic going in the other direction was allowed to proceed, and then the procedure would be reversed. Plaintiff, while stopped at the traffic control, was rear-ended by another vehicle driven by George Smithson. Smithson testified that he “must have looked off to the side” at some point prior to the collision because he did not see plaintiff’s vehicle before hitting it. He also testified that the primary reason the accident happened was that he was not paying attention and that he knew of no other cause of the accident. For the roadway contractor you couldn’t ask for a better admission. And it ended in the trial court just the way you thought it would, with a win for the roadway contractor. That is, until it was appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com