BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expert
    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


    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    Rather Than Limit Decision to "That Particular Part" of Developer's Policy Necessary to Bar Coverage, 10th Circuit Renders Questionable Decision on Exclusion j(6)

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Hacking Claim Under E&O Policy

    Illinois Appellate Court Address the Scope of the Term “Resident” in Homeowners Policy

    Coverage for Construction Defect Barred by Contractual-Liability Exclusion

    Home Builders Wear Many Hats

    Nondelegable Duty of Care Owed to Third Persons

    Heat Stress Deaths Show Europe Isn’t Ready for Climate Change

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: Indemnity Provisions

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Vermont Supreme Court Finds COVID-19 May Damage Property

    Fixing That Mistake

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    How the Jury Divided $112M in Seattle Crane Collapse Damages

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part II

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (09/06/23) – Nonprofit Helping Marginalized Groups, Life Sciences Taking over Office Space, and Housing Affordability Hits New Low

    An Additional Insured’s Reasonable Expectations may be Different from the Named Insured’s and Must be Considered to Determine whether the Additional Insured is Entitled to Defense from the Insurer of a Commercial Excess & Umbrella Liability Policy

    Contractors Board May Discipline Over Workers’ Comp Reporting

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

    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Jury Convicts Ciminelli, State Official in Bid-Rig Case

    Construction Robots 2023

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?

    As the Term Winds Down, Several Important Regulatory Cases Await the U.S. Supreme Court

    Groundbreaking on New Boulder Neighborhood

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    Following California Law, Federal Court Adopts Horizontal Allocation For Asbestos Coverage

    A Court-Side Seat: NWP 12 and the Dakota Access Pipeline Easement Get Forced Vacations, while a Potential Violation of the Eighth Amendment Isn’t Going Anywhere

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    General Contractor’s Intentionally False Certifications Bar It From Any Recovery From Owner

    ASCE Statement on Senate Passage Of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    School’s Lawsuit over Defective Field Construction Delayed

    Fatal Crane Collapse in Seattle Prompts Questions About Disassembly Procedures

    When Every Drop Matters, Cities Turn to Watertech

    Meet Your Future Team Members: AI Agents

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Following My Own Advice

    What are Section 8(f) Agreements?

    Mortgage Interest Rates Increase on Newly Built Homes

    The “Builder’s Remedy” Looms Over Bay Area Cities

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

    Things You Didn't Know About Your Homeowners Policy

    Nevada Assembly Sends Construction Defect Bill to Senate

    New FAR Rule Mandates the Use of PLAs on Large Construction Projects

    Building Inspector Refuses to State Why Apartments Condemned

    Cracked Girders Trigger Scrutiny of Salesforce Transit Center's Entire Structure

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia
    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

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    October 22, 2014 —
    Proponents of California’s high-speed rail project cleared a major hurdle this past week when the California Supreme Court declined to review a California Court of Appeals ruling which held that the state’s funding plan did not violate Proposition 1A, the voter-approved initiative passed in 2008, which provided initial funding for the project. For those like me who have been following the fits and starts of California’s high-speed rail project, it may be hard to remember how it all got started, and how we got to where we are. California's High-Speed Rail Project California’s high-speed rail project involves the construction of a high-speed passenger rail system running from Northern California to Southern California. The $68 billion system, expected to begin operation in 2029, will initially run from San Francisco to the Los Angeles basin in under 3 hours with train speeds capable of over 200 miles per hour. The system will eventually extend from Sacramento to San Diego covering a distance of approximately 800 miles with up to 24 stations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

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

    April 13, 2017 —
    I’ve yet to find reading through an insurance policy on anyone’s “bucket list.” But read them you should. Or have your attorney read through them (wink, wink). Because when you need to tender a claim there’s probably no more important document in the world. In Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc., Case No. C078665 (November 29, 2016), a client whose attorney did read the policy, bested the insurer of a policy it issued. Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. In 2006 or 2007, Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. installed a fireplace at a single-family home located in Copperopolis, California. At the time, Tidwell had a general commercial liability policy issued by Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc. which expired in March 2010. 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

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    December 30, 2013 —
    The Madison-St. Clair Record reports that a Wisconsin homeowner has sued the former owners of her home, alleging that they failed to disclose a defect. According to the lawsuit, David and Doris Stephens informed Jennifer Davies that a basement window well had previously leaked, but that the problem had been fixed and not recurred in three years. Ms. Davies had problems with the leaks after she moved in. And while the window was the only defect the Stepehenses reported, Ms. Davies found problems with the home’s heating and air conditioning as well. Though she paid only $112,000 for the home, Ms. Davies is suing for $400,000 for the repairs, loss of property value, and the court fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 1 – Substantive Due Process

    February 16, 2017 —
    Because of my personal political persuasions (pro-freedom) and success in litigating cases against the government and other media about those cases businesses frequently approach me about bringing claims against local governments and agencies for interfering with their Constitutional rights. Actions by local government agencies that could give rise to a Constitutional violation include: treating a developer’s project differently than a similar project, revoking a previously issued zoning or building permit, disqualifying a contractor from bidding on a government contract, retaliating against a business owner for speaking out against the local agency or one of its members, or unnecessarily delaying the issuance of a permit. The Constitutional rights most typically implicated in these cases are those guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. However, the 1st Amendment is also frequently implicated. Suing a local government agency for violating your Constitutional rights is not easy. However, the federal statute under which the cases are brought, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, provides for the award of a successful plaintiff’s attorneys fees. This is true even if the Judge or jury awards a mere $1 is damages. Moreover, sometimes there can be a strategic value in the litigation. This is the first in a series of blog posts exploring claims available to businesses harassed by local government agencies and officials and the challenges inherent in successfully bringing those claims. We will start with a claim for a substantive due process violation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

    April 29, 2024 —
    CHARLESTON, SC — On Thursday, the nationwide Engineering and Public Works Roadshow stopped at the Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston. The event highlighted the role engineers and public works professionals play in infrastructure projects like the local seawall improvements that increase coastal resiliency along the historic urban shoreline. The event, which took place along the newly constructed battery wall section between King Street and Battery Place along Murray Boulevard, marked the latest stop of the Engineering and Public Works Roadshow – a joint effort by the American Council of Engineering Companies, the American Public Works Association, and the American Society of Civil Engineers to bring public attention to the essential role engineers and public works professionals play in making our modern world possible. The battery project underscores the importance of innovative engineering solutions in addressing the challenges of climate change and rising sea levels. Thursday's event was also a chance to spotlight the engineering, construction, and public officials involved in the project, whose work often goes unrecognized. About the Engineering and Public Works Roadshow: The Engineering and Public Works Roadshow is a series of nationwide events highlighting critical infrastructure projects and the skilled professionals who make them possible. It is an opportunity to learn about the importance of infrastructure investment, showcase the work of engineers and public works professionals, and celebrate these projects' positive impact on our communities. Learn more at www.infrastructureroadshow.org. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    July 30, 2019 —
    These days in construction, and other pursuits, teaming agreements have become a great method for large and small contractors to work together to take advantage of various contract and job requirements from minority participation to veteran ownership. With the proliferation of these agreements, parties must be careful in how they draft the terms of these agreements. Without proper drafting, the parties risk unenforceability of the teaming agreement in the evewnt of a dispute. One potential pitfall in drafting is an “agreement to agree” or an agreement to negotiate a separate contract in the future. This type of pitfall was illustrated in the case of InDyne Inc. v. Beacon Occupational Health & Safety Services Inc. out of the Eastern District of Virginia. In this case, InDyne and Beacon entered into a teaming agreement that provided that InDyne as Prime would seek to use Beacon, the Sub, in the event that InDyne was awarded a contract using Beacon’s numbers. The teaming agreement further provided:
    The agreement shall remain in effect until the first of the following shall occur: … (g) inability of the Prime and the Sub, after negotiating in good faith, to reach agreement on the terms of a subcontract offered by the Prime, in accordance with this agreement.
    InDyne was subsequently awarded a contract with the Air Force and shortly thereafter sent a subcontract to Beacon and requested Beacon’s “best and final” pricing. Beacon protested by letter stating that it was only required to act consistently with its original bid pricing. Beacon then returned the subcontract with the original bid pricing and accepting all but a termination for convenience provision. Shortly thereafter, InDyne informed Beacon that InDyne had awarded the subcontract to one of Beacon’s competitors. Beacon of course sued and argued that the teaming agreement required that InDyne award the subcontract to Beacon. 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

    Genuine Dispute Summary Judgment Reversed for Abuse of Discretion and Trial of Fact Questions About Expert Opinions

    July 27, 2020 —
    In Fadeeff v. State Farm General Ins. Co. (No. A155691, filed 5/22/20 ord. pub. 6/8/20), a California appeals court held that triable issues of fact and the trial court’s failure to address a request for a continuance precluded summary judgment for an insurer under the genuine dispute doctrine. In Fadeeff, the policyholders made a claim to State Farm for smoke damage to their home from the 2015 Valley Fire in Hidden Valley Lake, California. With State Farm’s approval, the insureds retained the restoration company, ServPro, to assist with smoke and soot mitigation. State Farm documented smoke and soot on the interior walls, ceilings and carpeting, and on all exterior elevations, including on the deck and handrail. State Farm made a series of payments on the claim totaling about $50,000. The insureds then hired a public adjuster and submitted supplemental claims for further dwelling repairs and additional contents replacement, totaling approximately $75,000. State Farm responded by using its own independent adjuster to investigate, who was neither licensed as an adjuster, nor as a contractor. State Farm also retained forensic consultants for the structure and the HVAC system, but neither the independent adjuster nor the consultants were aware that State Farm had an internal operation guide for the use of third-party experts in handling first party claims, which guidelines were therefore not followed. In addition, the consultants made allegedly superficial inspections, with one attributing smoke and soot damage to other sources of combustion, including the insureds’ exterior propane barbecue, an internal wood fireplace and wood stove and candles that had been burned in the living room. None of the consultants asked the insureds when they had last used any of the sources of combustion. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    February 23, 2017 —
    The additional insured unsuccessfully sought to recover damages to its building caused by the named insured. Brit UW, Ltd. v. Tripar, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2462 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 6, 2017). Davis Russell Real Estate and Management LLC hired Tripar, Inc., a general contractor, to renovate a 12-unit apartment building. The entire roof was to be replaced by a roofing subcontractor. Davis Russell drafted a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) that governed the project. Tripar was to obtain a CGL policy and provide a certificate of insurance evidencing the coverage. Davis Russell was to be named as an additional insured. Tripar's insurance broker prepared a certificate of insurance reflecting that a CGL policy was issued to Tripar by Brit UW, Ltd. But the certificate clearly stated that it was not issued by the insurer and that it did not alter coverage. The certificate of insurance further stated that it conferred no rights upon the holder. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com