BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    Daiwa House to Invest 150 Billion Yen in U.S. Rental Housing

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    Governor Ducey Vetoes Water and Development Bills

    Las Vegas Student Housing Developer Will Name Replacement Contractor

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Design, Legal and Accounting all Fight a War on Billable Hours After the Advent of AI

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/17/22) – Glass Ceilings, Floating Homes and the Inflation Reduction Act

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    L.A. Mixes Grit With Glitz in Downtown Revamp: Cities

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Faster Pace in January

    Is Modular Construction Destined to Fail?

    Women Make Their Mark on Construction Leadership

    Construction Defect Lawsuit Came too Late in Minnesota

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Charles Eppolito Appointed Vice-Chair of the PBA Judicial Evaluation Commission and Receives Prestigious “President’s Award”

    NARI Addresses Construction Defect Claim Issues for Remodeling Contractors

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    Insurance Policies Broadly Defining “Suits” May Prompt an Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Indemnify During the Chapter 558 Pre-Suit Notice Process

    Workarounds for Workers' Comp Immunity: How to Obtain Additional Insured Coverage when the Named Insured is Immune from Suit

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    California Imposes New Disabled Access Obligations on Commercial Property Owners

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Your Bad Faith Jury Instruction Against an Insurer is Important

    Insurance and Your Roof

    A Property Boom Is Coming to China's Smaller Cities

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

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    43% of U.S. Homes in High Natural Disaster Risk Areas

    What is a Subordination Agreement?

    David McLain Recognized Among the 2021 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for Construction Law

    2017 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    Policy's Operation Classification Found Ambiguous

    Overruling Henkel, California Supreme Court Validates Assignment of Policies

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

    Massachusetts Federal Court Rejects Adria Towers, Finds Construction Defects Not an “Occurrence”

    Contract Change #9: Owner’s Right to Carry Out the Work (law note)

    Efficient Proximate Cause Applies to Policy's Collapse Provisions

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Faulty Work By Subcontractor Constitutes "Occurrence"

    The G2G Year in Review: 2021

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Gets Construction Defect Bill to Committee

    Recent Statutory Changes Cap Retainage on Applicable Construction Projects

    Homebuilders Are Fighting Green Building. Homeowners Will Pay.

    Balcony Collapses Killing Six People

    Trump, Infrastructure and the Construction Industry

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance
    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

    Another Colorado City Passes Construction Defects Ordinance

    February 18, 2015 —
    Lone Tree, Colorado’s City Council passed an ordinance to distinguish its construction defect laws from the state’s, according to the Denver Business Journal. The city of Lakewood passed a similar ordinance last October. The Denver Business Journal reported that the new “ordinance makes changes such as establishing time frames for notifying the builder of a construction defect, allowing the builder to inspect the property and allowing the builder to repair the problem, with the homeowners' agreement.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors Liable For Their Subcontractor’s Failure To Pay Its Employees’ Wages And Benefits

    November 01, 2022 —
    Recently, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed two House Bills that amend the Illinois Wage Payment & Collections Act, 820 ILCS 115 et. seq. (“Wage Act”), to provide greater protection for individuals working in the construction trades against wage theft in a defined class of projects. Pursuant to this new law, every general contractor, construction manager, or “primary contractor,” working on the projects included in the Bill’s purview will be liable for wages that have not been paid by a subcontractor or lower-tier subcontractor on any contract entered into after July 1, 2022, together with unpaid fringe benefits plus attorneys’ fees and costs that are incurred by the employee in bringing an action under the Wage Act. This new wage theft law follows several other states that have considered and passed similar legislation. These amendments to the Wage Act apply to a primary contractor engaged in “erection, construction, alteration, or repair of a building structure, or other private work.” However, there are important limitations to the amendment’s applicability. The amendment does not apply to projects under contract with state or local government, or to general contractors that are parties to a collective bargaining agreement on a project where the work is being performed. Additionally, the amendment does not apply to primary contractors who are doing work with a value of less than $20,000, or work that involves only the altering or repairing of an existing single-family dwelling or single residential unit in a multi-unit building. Reprinted courtesy of Edward O. Pacer, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (ConsensusDocs) and David J. Scriven-Young, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Pacer may be contacted at epacer@pecklaw.com Mr. Scriven-Young may be contacted at dscriven-young@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Preparing Your Business For Internal Transition

    October 14, 2019 —
    When is it right to start thinking about succession planning and preparing a construction company for transition? Many would agree – in concept, at least – that serious thought regarding succession and transition planning should begin at a company’s inception and be revisited throughout its lifecycle, but as a practical matter, it is frequently not part of the mindset when growing a business. This article explores issues that construction company owners should consider in order to achieve smooth transition of ownership and control. We will address three critical questions:
    • What happens to the business when an owner retires;
    • In the event an owner(s) become disabled; and,
    • Unplanned exit/owner pre-deceases her/his exit from the company
    Owners who do not plan carefully for transition are often faced with the less than appealing option of liquidating their business for much less than its value, or by closing the business with no return upon that event. However, those who plan carefully can realize the value of their life’s work, pass the business to the next generation and see their legacy continue. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen P. Katz, Esq., Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Katz may be contacted at skatz@pecklaw.com

    No Damages for Delay May Not Be Enforceable in Virginia

    January 08, 2024 —
    Anyone who reads Construction Law Musings with any regularity (thank you by the way) knows that the contract is king in most instances here in Virginia. Any commercial construction subcontractor in Virginia is likely also very familiar with so-called “no damages for delay” clauses in construction contracts. These clauses essentially state that a subcontractor’s only remedy for a delay caused by any factor beyond its control (including the fault of the general contractor), after proper notice to the general contractor, is an extension of time to complete the work. However, in 2015 the Virginia General Assembly passed a change in the law that precluded the diminishment of any right to claims for demonstrated additional costs prior to payment. This left open the question as to which types of “diminishment” would be barred by the statute. The recent case out of the Eastern District of Virginia federal court, Strata Solar LLC v. Fall Line Construction LLC, added a bit of clarity. 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

    Will the Hidden Cracks in the Bay Bridge Cause Problems During an Earthquake?

    June 26, 2014 —
    Despite a “no cracks” welding code and contract provision for the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, in 2008 Caltrans proceeded with the project despite welding cracks created by the Chinese firm hired to build the roadway, according to the Sacramento Bee. By the time the cracks had been discovered, the costs were at $6.5 billion and climbing, and fixing the cracks would be time-consuming and expensive. However, there is some dispute as to rather the welding “cracks represent a hazard to the traveling public.” “Examine history,” Brian Maroney, Caltrans’ chief engineer for the bridge, said in a recent interview by the Sacramento Bee. “… Caltrans reviewed major quakes around the globe and never found a case in which weld cracks caused bridge-roadway fractures.” However, the Sacramento Bee reported that there was a case where welding cracks led to fractures. For instance, after the southern California earthquake in 1994 centered in Northridge, the Santa Clara River Bridge “suffered several fractures in steel girders. The breaks were traced to tiny cracks in welds, likely present before the quake, and worsened by vibrations of heavy trucks passing overhead. When the quake struck, the girders fractured.” The Santa Clara bridge did not collapse. Sacramento Bee claimed it remained standing because the I-beam-shaped girders were “not fracture-critical.” However, the Bay Bridge’s “roadway consists of box-girder segments welded together. In effect, they create one contiguous, fracture-critical girder,” Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, UC Berkeley engineering professor told the Sacramento Bee. “If welds crack and grow rapidly during a large quake, the entire roadway could fail.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Safety, Compliance and Productivity on the Jobsite

    November 18, 2019 —
    With any project, managing a large contingency of workers—all with varying levels of security clearance—can be a logistical headache. On the majority of construction sites, managers lack the resources to quickly and accurately identify all onsite personnel and ensure the right labor, equipment and materials are in the right place at the right time. Equally important, construction managers need to know if worker certifications are current and only allow access to authorized areas. Multiple factors compound the need for better transparency across the workforce, including:
    • Safety. Construction work is inherently dangerous. In 2017, nearly 1,000 fatalities occurred on construction sites. This means that the industry accounted for more than 20% of private sector fatalities across all industries.
    • Regulatory. The Federal government has a heightened awareness of jobsite dangers and is targeting companies that are not making every effort to maximize the workers’ safety.
    • Security. Sites in urban environments require round-the-clock protection from urban explorers, thieves and the general public.
    • Employee wage disputes. Lawsuits and disputes over wages and hourly employment are increasing.
    • Reduced productivity. It can be difficult to measure and track productivity in construction.
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew Ramage, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    April 06, 2016 —
    In Pennsylvania, pursuant to the Municipal Claims and Tax Liens Act (53 P.S. §7293(a)) (the Act), the owner of a property sold under a tax or municipal claim may redeem the sold property at any time within nine months after the date of acknowledgment of the sheriff's deed by, in general, paying the amount of the debt. However, there is a caveat contained in the Act with respect to vacant property, which states that “there shall be no redemption of vacant property by any person after the date of the acknowledgment of the sheriff's deed.” (53 P.S. §7293(c)). In Brentwood Borough School District v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 111 A.3d 807 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015), a case of first impression before the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the court addressed the definition of “vacant property” under the Act and the timing of a petitioner to invoke the right of redemption with respect to vacant property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Suzanne Prybella, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Prybella may be contacted at prybellas@whiteandwilliams.com

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    February 05, 2024 —
    The general contractor on a New Orleans condominium construction project obtained a Contractor Controlled Insurance Program/CCIP policy or "Wrap-Up" policy for the job. An accident occurred on the job when a construction elevator/hoist fell, injuring several workers. The elevator/hoist was provided by a subcontractor, pursuant to a rental agreement and related subcontract with the general contractor. Contained within the subcontract was a provision which states that the general contractor "has arranged for the Project to be insured under a controlled insurance program (the "CCIP" or "WrapUp"),” and that the CCIP shall provide "commercial general liability insurance and excess liability insurance, in connection with the performance of the Work at the Project site." A third-party administrator for the wrap-up policy had been in communication with the subcontractor prior to the commencement of the work, “specifically advising that insurance coverage was not automatic” and providing the subcontractor with an enrollment form for the CCIP. Ultimately, the subcontractor “declined to comply with the request,” stating that the subcontractor would "not participate in paying any wrap insurance premiums" – because the subcontractor had its own insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com