BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    SCOTUS, Having Received Views of Solicitor General, Will Decide Whether CWA Regulates Indirect Discharge of Pollutants Into Navigable Water Via Groundwater

    One-Upmanship by Contractors In Prevailing Wage Decision Leads to a Bad Result for All . . . Perhaps

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Supreme Court of New York Denies Motion in all but One Cause of Action in Kikirov v. 355 Realty Assoc., et al.

    Lithium for Batteries from Geothermal Brine

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    2021 Real Estate Trends: New Year, New Reality—A Day of Reckoning for Borrowers and Tenants

    Lessee Deemed Statutory Employer, Immune from Tort Liability by Pennsylvania Court

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/18/23) – Construction Inventory, 3D Printing, and Metaverse Replicas

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    Design-Assist Collaboration/Follow-up Post

    Daniel Ferhat Receives Two Awards for Service to the Legal Community

    Appetite for Deconstruction

    Terminating Contracts for Convenience — “Just Because”

    Locating Construction Equipment with IoT and Mobile Technology

    Construction Suit Ends with Just an Apology

    Rising Construction Disputes Require Improved Legal Finance

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    The Moving Finish Line: Statutes of Limitation and Repose Are Not Always What They Seem

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Hard to Believe It, Construction Law Musings is 16

    Insurer's Late Notice Defense Fails on Summary Judgment

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    COVID-19 Response: Key Legal Considerations for Event Cancellations

    Product Liability Alert: “Sophisticated User” Defense Not Available by Showing Existence of a “Sophisticated Intermediary”

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    National Coalition to Provide Boost for Building Performance Standards

    Up in Smoke - 5th Circuit Finds No Coverage for Hydrochloric Acid Spill Based on Pollution Exclusion

    Insurer Incorrectly Relies Upon "Your Work" Exclusion to Deny Coverage

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    US Appeals Court Slams FERC on Long-Muddled State Environmental Permits

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: No-Damages-for-Delay Clause

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Benefit of the Coblentz Agreement and Consent Judgment

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Protecting the Integrity of Referral Sources under Florida Statute s. 542.335

    Court Addresses When Duty to Defend Ends

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    Eighth Circuit Considers Judicial Estoppel in Hazardous Substance Release-Related Personal Injury Case

    OSHA’s Multi-Employer Citation Policy: What Employers on Construction Sites Need to Know

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    Denver Officials Clamor for State Construction Defect Law

    Facebook Posts “Not Relevant” Rules Florida Appeals Court

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons
    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

    New York’s Lawsky Proposes Changes to Reduce Home Foreclosures

    May 20, 2015 —
    New York’s banking regulator proposed changes to the foreclosure process to try to help borrowers in the state keep their homes. One reason New York has a high rate of foreclosures is that mandatory settlement meetings between borrowers and mortgage servicers typically don’t take place for months after a bank initiates a foreclosure, Benjamin Lawsky, superintendent of New York’s Department of Financial Services said in prepared remarks Tuesday. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Westbrook, Bloomberg

    San Francisco Sues Over Sinking Millennium Tower

    November 17, 2016 —
    Dennis Herrera, San Francisco’s city attorney, filed a lawsuit against the developer of the Millennium Tower, “for failing to inform buyers that it was sinking ‘much faster than expected,’” reported the New York Times. Mission Street Development sold more than 400 units in the skyscraper. “They went ahead and sold condominiums for a handsome profit without telling the buyers about the situation,” Mr. Herrera told the New York Times. “This is every homeowner’s worst nightmare.” The spokesman for the development, P.J. Johnson, stated that “the allegations by the city attorney had ‘no merit,’ and that the “building had sunk within ‘predicted, safe ranges’ during the entire sales process,” according to the New York Times. Furthermore, Johnson asserted that the problem derived from the nearby railroad station removing water from the ground, which “had caused the building to ‘settle beyond the 12 inches it was predicted to settle.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Attorney’s Fees Entitlement And Application Under Subcontract Default Provision

    May 06, 2019 —
    Many subcontracts contain a provision in the default section that reads something to the effect: “Upon any default, Subcontractor shall pay to Contractor its attorney’s fees and court costs incurred in enforcing this Subcontract or seeking any remedies hereunder.” Oftentimes, a party may wonder as to the enforceability of the provision and how it is applied in the context of a dispute between a contractor and its subcontractor where both parties have asserted claims against the other. In an opinion out of the Middle District of Georgia, U.S. f/u/b/o Cleveland Construction, Inc. v. Stellar Group, Inc., 2019 WL 338887 (M.D.Ga. 2019), a subcontractor and prime contractor on a federal construction project each asserted claims against the other in the approximate amount of $4 Million, meaning there was a potential $8 Million swing in the dispute. The subcontract contained a provision entitling the contractor to recover attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing the subcontract or seeking remedies under the subcontract upon any default, identical to the provision above. 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

    Colorado House Bill 1279 Stalls over 120-day Unit Owner Election Period

    April 20, 2017 —
    With the session more than halfway through, the Colorado Legislature’s 2017 attempts at meaningful construction defect reform may fail again. This year, the Legislature did not attempt a single-bill construction defect overhaul like those that have failed over the last half-decade. Rather, it has sought to enact reforms on a piecemeal basis, with several smaller bills addressing specific issues that have been affecting condominium construction along Colorado’s booming Front Range. This new approach appears to be headed towards much the same outcome as the failed efforts of the past. House Bill 1169 would have given developers a statutory right to repair before being sued by homeowners, and Senate Bill 156 would mandate arbitration or mediation. Both have been assigned to the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee (often viewed as the “bill-kill committee”), and have little chance of being resuscitated this session. This was also the fate of House Bill 1279, but bipartisan support had many believing that it still had a chance of passing—at least until last week. House Bill 1279 would require an executive board of a homeowners association to satisfy several prerequisites before suing a developer or builder, namely to (1) notify all unit owners and the developer or builder against whom the lawsuit is being considered; (2) call an association meeting where the builder or developer could present relevant facts and arguments; and (3) get approval from the majority of the unit owners after providing detailed disclosures about the lawsuit, including the potential costs and benefits thereof. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Killer Subcontract Provisions

    January 20, 2020 —
    We are frequently requested by subcontractor clients to review the subcontract that has been prepared by the prime contractor, before our client signs it. While no two agreements are identical, there are a number of problematic contract provisions that appear in many agreements. Here is a list of ten such provisions (and their variations) that are potential “deal breakers”:
    1. PAY IF/WHEN PAID (e.g. “Contractor shall have the right to exhaust all legal remedies, including appeals, prior to having an obligation to pay Subcontractor.”) “Pay-if-paid” provisions (“Receipt of payment from Owner shall be a condition precedent to Contractor’s duty to pay Subcontractor”) are illegal in California. However, the only legal limit on “Pay-When-Paid” provisions is that payment must be made “within a reasonable time.” The example above, as written, essentially affords the prime contractor a period of several years following completion of the project before that contractor has an independent duty to pay its subcontractors – not a “reasonable” amount of time, to those waiting to be paid. A compromise is to provide a time limit, such as 6 months or one year following substantial completion of the project.
    2. CROSS-PROJECT SET-OFF (e.g. “In the event of disputes or default by Subcontractor, Contractor shall have the right to withhold sums due Subcontractor on this Project and on any other project on which Subcontractor is performing work for Contractor.”) Such provisions are problematic and likely unenforceable, as they potentially bar subcontractors’ lien rights. Such provisions should be deleted.
    3. CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR DESIGN QUALITY (e.g. “Subcontractor warrants that the Work shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”) Unless a subcontractor’s scope of work expressly includes design work, this provision should either be deleted or modified, with the addition of the following phrase: “Subcontractor shall not be responsible for conformance of the design of its work to applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    January 14, 2015 —
    I live in one of the few buildings in New York that still has a manual elevator. When I ask the operator on the morning shift how he's doing, his well-oiled response is "up and down." For the last 160 years, elevators have travelled a predictably vertical path. That will soon change when the German manufacturer ThyssenKrupp introduces the first fleet of cable-free cars that can also move sideways. The system, dubbed MULTI, will allow multiple cabs to motor along a single, looping shaft. The cars move by magnetic levitation (the same technology behind some high-speed trains), rather than being pulled by the heavy steel ropes that limit how high skyscrapers can stretch. With MULTI, architects will be able to build spindly towers on small plots formerly deemed untenable for high-rises. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Belinda Lanks, Bloomberg
    Ms. Lanks may be contacted at blanks@bloomberg.net

    Mind The Appeal Or: A Lesson From Auto-Owners Insurance Co. V. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. On Timing Insurance Bad Faith And Declaratory Judgment Insurance Claims Following A Nunn-Agreement

    August 06, 2019 —
    On May 30, 2019, Judge Richard Brooke Jackson of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado offered an insightful lesson to the parties in Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc.[1] on the importance of ripeness in declaratory judgment insurance actions and bad faith counterclaims. The case arrived in front of Judge Jackson based on the following fact pattern. A homeowner association (Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc.) (“Association”) brought construction defect claims against a variety of prime contractors and those contractors subsequently brought third-party construction defect claims against subcontractors. One of the prime contractors assigned their claims against a subcontractor by the name Sierra Glass Co., Inc. (“Sierra”) to the Association and all the other claims between all the parties settled. On the eve of trial involving only the Association’s assigned claims against Sierra, the Association made a settlement demand on Sierra for $1.9 million. Sierra asked its insurance carrier, Auto-Owners Insurance, Co. (“AOIC”), which had been defending Sierra under a reservation of rights letter, to settle the case for that amount, but AOIC refused. This prompted Sierra to enter into a “Nunn-Agreement” with the Association whereby the case would proceed to trial, Sierra would refrain from offering a defense at trial, the Association would not pursue any recovery against Sierra for the judgment, and Sierra would assign any insurance bad faith claims it may have had against AOIC to the Association. (“Nunn-Agreement”) Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Meyer may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com

    How to Survive the Insurance Claim Process Before It Starts –Five Tips to Keep Your Insurance Healthy

    December 15, 2016 —
    Every day we read about fires, floods and other tragedies that occur. They seem to be so prevalent, now than ever before. The old notion that “it can’t happen to my family” is not the best approach to being ready if you are faced with a claim. Preparation is the key to readiness in the world of insurance. These five tips can easily be implemented just in case:
    1. Check your coverage now – not after a catastrophic event for your family. Know and ask in writing if all your insurance needs are covered and your financial limits are sufficient. A phone call to your agent or broker can start the process, but at the conclusion of the process confirm any advice or adjustments in writing, and save it in your insurance file. Policies and important correspondence can be imaged and saved in the cloud so it’s retrievable if a big loss occurs. Ask your child or grandchild how to do this if you do not understand the cloud storage and retrieval system.
    2. Video your belongings and save in the cloud. – Use your smart phone to video your home, contents, boats, etc. Talk about the items in the viewfinder as you go. If there are expensive personal items, note their worth and ask your agent or broker if such items need to be “scheduled”---detailed with agreed upon amounts. You pay a little extra on these items but you can then recover their actual value if lost. Most “personal property” items fall under a general category under most homeowner policies and may not be sufficient.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Robert K. Scott, Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
    Mr. Scott may be contacted at Robert.scott@ndlf.com