BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut slope failure 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


    No Occurrence Found for Damage to Home Caused by Settling

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    SunCal Buys Oak Knoll Development for the Second Time

    Back to Basics: What is a Changes Clause?

    Insurer Granted Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Claim

    Portions of Policyholder's Expert's Opinions Excluded

    When a Request for Equitable Adjustment Should Be Treated as a Claim Under the Contract Disputes Act

    Fraudster Sells 24-Bedroom ‘King’s Speech’ London Mansion

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    Insurers Refuse Indemnification of Subcontractors in Construction Defect Suit

    Famed NYC Bridge’s Armor Is Focus of Suit Against French Company

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 43 White and Williams Lawyers

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “This Is Sufficient for Your Purposes …”

    White and Williams Obtains Reversal on Appeal of $2.5 Million Verdict Against Electric Utility Company

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    In Louisiana, Native Americans Struggle to Recover From Ida

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: The Colorado Court of Appeals’ Decision Protecting a Declarant’s Right to Arbitration in Construction Defect Cases

    HVAC System Collapses Over Pool at Gaylord Rockies Resort Colorado

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million

    Filling Out the Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    New York Developers Facing Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Utilities’ Extreme Plan to Stop Wildfires: Shut Off the Power

    Disappointment on an Olympian Scale After Rio 2016 Summer Games

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute- The Claim

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL

    Real Estate Trends: Looking Ahead to 2021

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Appeals Court Upholds Decision by Referee in Trial Court for Antagan v Shea Homes

    City and Contractor Disclaim Responsibility for Construction Error that Lead to Blast

    Developer Boymelgreen Forced to Hand Over Financial Records for 15 Broad Street

    Capitol View-Corridor Restrictions Affect Massing of Austin’s Tallest Tower

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    Free Texas MCLE Seminar at BHA Houston June 13th

    Manhattan Developer Breaks Ground on $520 Million Project

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions, Four Attorneys Promoted to Partner and One Attorney Promoted to Counsel

    The Contributors to This Blog Are Pleased to Announce That….

    When is an Indemnification Provision Unenforceable?

    Virginia Joins California and Nevada in Passing its Consumer Privacy Act

    Vincent Alexander Named to Florida Trend’s Legal Elite
    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

    COVID-19 Business Interruption Lawsuits Begin: Iconic Oceana Grill in New Orleans Files Insurance Coverage Lawsuit

    April 20, 2020 —
    On Monday, the iconic New Orleans restaurant, Oceana Grill, filed the first Coronavirus-related business interruption insurance coverage lawsuit in a US jurisdiction. The declaratory judgment action styled Cajun Conti, LLC, et. al. d/b/a Oceana Grill v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London was filed in Louisiana state court for the Parish of Orleans. As a direct result of the government-mandated closures and restrictions on public gatherings implemented by the City of New Orleans and State of Louisiana, Oceana Grill’s petition anticipates a significant loss of business income. Based on allegations in the petition, there are several aspects of Oceana Grill’s policy that make this a good test case for business interruption coverage stemming from the Coronavirus. Although the specific policy language is not quoted in the petition, coverage provisions are categorically identified throughout. As a preliminary matter, the policy at issue appears to be written on an “all risks” basis, meaning the insuring agreement of the policy would likely be triggered generally by all risks of “physical loss or damage” unless specifically excluded. This basis for coverage, which is common in property policies, is advantageous to policyholders, as it limits the insured’s burden of proof to establishing that there was physical loss or damage while leaving the burden of applying any more specific exclusion to the insurance company. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Speculative Luxury Homebuilding on the Rise

    April 08, 2014 —
    Forbes reported that there is a “comeback in speculative building of luxury homes in centers of wealth across the country.” “The appearance of spec homes in the upper price range is an indication of the maturation of the housing cycle,” Stuart Gabriel, director of the Ziman Center for Real Estate at UCLA, told Forbes. “It’s an indication of increasing levels of confidence on the part of home builders.” Dana Kuhn, of the Corky McMillin Center for Real Estate at San Diego State University, stated that she “would expect luxury buyers to want more design control than can be afforded them if the house is mostly complete when they make their purchase.” But the article showed the flip side: Some luxury buyers are “too busy to bother with such involvement” and even prefer to buy the house fully furnished. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Kushners Abandon Property Bid as Pressures Mount Over Conflicts

    May 10, 2017 —
    A company owned by the family of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, has abandoned plans to buy a sprawling industrial site in New Jersey from Honeywell International Inc., a major federal contractor, and develop it into a residential community. Kushner Cos. had been the leading bidder for the 95-acre formerly contaminated site known as Bayfront, which is co-owned by Honeywell and Jersey City, city officials said. The company had submitted plans to build as many as 8,100 housing units to be marketed to Orthodox Jewish residents of the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn who are being priced out of that neighborhood. Last fall, the Kushners bid about $150 million, tens of millions higher than competitors, according to people involved in the negotiations. Honeywell heard from others who would only make an offer once the environmental approvals for the cleaned-up site were final. So the bidding is scheduled to reopen later this year and Kushner Cos. had been expected to continue in the process, the people said. But on Tuesday, when Bloomberg News asked about Bayfront, company spokesman James Yolles said the Kushners are no longer pursuing the project. He wouldn’t elaborate or explain. Reprinted courtesy of David Kocieniewski, Bloomberg and Caleb Melby, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What Cal/OSHA’s “Permanent” COVID Standards Mean for Employers

    March 06, 2023 —
    Effective Feb. 3, 2023, California has implemented new, “permanent,” COVID-19 standards. The new regulations were adopted by Cal/OSHA on Dec. 15, 2022, but only became effective upon the review and final approval by the Office of Administrative Law. These non-emergency regulations—slated to remain in effect for two years—supplant the COVID-19 Prevention Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) that have been in effect since early in the pandemic. The non-emergency regulations abandon core parts of the ETS, include new definitions for key terms, and update requirements for important provisions. We discuss the primary changes below. The regulation itself is available online, as well as a copy provided by Cal/OSHA comparing the differences between the ETS and the new regulation. An End to Exclusion Pay The non-emergency regulations do not require employers to maintain exclusion pay (an excluded employee’s earnings, seniority, rights, and benefits). All that employers must do under the new regulations is inform confirmed COVID-19 cases and close contacts about potential COVID-19 benefits under federal or local laws (where applicable). This does not affect employees who may receive paid time off under other federal, state, and local laws, as well as through collective bargaining agreements or other employer policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    The U.S. Flooded One of Houston’s Richest Neighborhoods to Save Everyone Else

    December 01, 2017 —
    “Next contestant, come on down.” On Oct. 6, in a bright courtroom in downtown Houston, Susan Braden, chief justice of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, opens a preliminary hearing with a joke, beckoning a lawyer forward. Braden has flown in from Washington to oversee disputes involving the homes and businesses flooded in West Houston after Hurricane Harvey made landfall over Texas in late August. She has summoned attorneys interested in suing, to get their thoughts on how the proceedings should unfold. Almost 100 lawyers are present, combed and buzzing in anticipation of what promises to be some of the most complex and expensive litigation ever brought against the federal government. Observers speculate that thousands of plaintiffs could eventually join in, and that the total damages claimed could reach $10 billion or more, especially if the big energy and oil companies—whose presence in one section of West Houston gave it the nickname the Energy Corridor—sue over their flooded headquarters. Eighty suits, 11 of which are seeking class-action status, have been filed by homeowners against the federal government, though many of the Energy Corridor’s approximately 9,500 residents are still weighing their options, speed-dating lawyers by phone and at community meetings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon Sims, Bloomberg

    Is Solar the Next Focus of Construction Defect Suits?

    June 28, 2013 —
    There’s been a rapid growth in the sale of solar panels, and that’s lead some industry observers to wonder if manufacturers have been cutting back on quality. Current use of solar is six times what it was in 2008, with more than forty percent of that in the last year. The growth shows no sign of stopping, either. The Solar Energy Industry Association expects the amount of power generated by solar to increase by more than two-thirds in 2013. With the oversupply, some fear that companies are relaxing their quality control. The New York Times found that there were widespread problems of defective units in solar cells, chiefly those manufactured in China. The Times article noted that at two solar plants in Spain, defect rates reached 34.5 percent. Some industry observers disagree. The Insurance Journal quoted Andy Klump, the CEO of Clean Energy Associates, a Shanghai firm that provides quality assurance in the solar industry, who said that if a business had a 34 percent failure rate, “they would be out of business in a heartbeat.” Mr. Klump described the Times article as “not realistic.” If the Times is right, Scott Turner, a construction insurance attorney, feels that the industry should ready itself for “a wave of large lawsuits.” Turner feels that “this litigation wave could make the battles over liability and insurance coverage for Chinese drywall seem like a small claims dispute.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Antidiscrimination Clause Required in Public Works and Goods and Services Contracts­ –Effective January 1, 2024

    January 22, 2024 —
    In July 2023, the Washington legislature passed Senate Bill 5186, which mandates inclusion of select antidiscrimination clauses in every state contract and subcontract for public works, goods, or services executed after January 1, 2024.[i] RCW 49.60.530(3) codifies the now-required antidiscrimination clauses, which prohibit four categories of discrimination against any person because of age, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, honorably discharged veteran or military status, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability (the “Protected Class”). Under the new law, public contractors and subcontractors (“Public Contractor”) may not refuse to hire a person because that person is a member of the Protected Class, unless that refusal is based upon a bona fide occupational qualification or if a person with a particular disability would be prevented from properly performing the particular work involved.[ii] Similarly, Public Contractors may not discharge or bar a person from employment or discriminate against any person ­­– either in terms of compensation or other terms and conditions of employment – because that person is a member of the Protected Class.[iii] Last, Public Contractors may not print or circulate (or cause to be printed or circulated) any statement, advertisement, publication, form of application for employment, or make inquiry in connection with prospective employment, which expresses any limitation, specification, or discrimination as to the Protected Class.[iv] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Travis Colburn, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Mr. Colburn may be contacted at travis.colburn@acslawyers.com

    Court Bars Licensed Contractor From Seeking Compensation for Work Performed by Unlicensed Sub

    June 06, 2022 —
    It all started with a tree. A eucalyptus tree to be exact. What followed is one of the more important cases to be decided under Business and Professions Code section 7031 in recent years. Yes, that Section 7031. The statute variously described by the state’s courts as “harsh[ ],” draconian” and “unjust,” but, importantly, nevertheless valid. Under Section 7031, an unlicensed contractor is barred from seeking compensation for work requiring a contractor’s license. This has been called the “shield.” However, in addition to the “shield,” project owners can also employ Section 7031’s “sword,” and seek disgorgement of all monies paid to an unlicensed contractor. Section 7031’s “shield” and “sword” applies even if the project owner knew that the contractor was unlicensed. They also apply even if the unlicensed contractor’s work was flawless. And they also apply even if a contractor was unlicensed during a portion of its work. This is because, as courts have stated, Section 7031 is a consumer protection statute intended to protect the public from unlicensed contractors and applies irrespective of the equities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com