BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    Navigating Abandonment of a Construction Project

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    Making the Construction Industry a Safer place for Women

    Public Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claim

    More on Fraud, Opinions and Contracts

    Property Damage to Insured's Own Work is Not Covered

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/25/23) – Artificial Intelligence, Proptech Innovation, and Drone Adoption

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    California Federal Court Finds a Breach of Contract Exclusion in a CGL Policy Bars All Coverage for a Construction Defect Action

    Mediating Contract Claims and Disputes at the ASBCA

    It’s All a Matter of [Statutory] Construction: Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets the Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Requirements in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co.

    DC Wins Largest-Ever Civil Penalty in US Housing Discrimination Suit

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Engineer Proposes Slashing Scope of Millennium Tower Pile Upgrade

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Statute of Limitations Bars Lender’s Subsequent Action to Quiet Title Against Junior Lienholder Mistakenly Omitted from Initial Judicial Foreclosure Action

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    New York Court Temporarily Enjoins UCC Foreclosure Sale

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    Do You Have A Florida’s Deceptive And Unfair Trade Practices Act Claim

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Haight Welcomes Robert S. Rucci

    Anticipatory Repudiation of a Contract — The Prospective Breach

    Claim for Consequential Damages Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case Denied

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    Commercial Development Nearly Quadruples in Jacksonville Area

    Cities' Answer to Sprawl? Go Wild.

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”

    Los Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal Fight

    District Court's Ruling Affirmed in TCD v American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

    When Employer’s Liability Coverage May Be Limited in New York

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    E-Commerce Logistics Test Limits of Tilt-Up Construction

    No Coverage for Construction Defects Under Arkansas Law

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Construction Lien Does Not Include Late Fees Separate From Interest

    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    Insurer Waives Objection to Appraiser's Partiality by Waiting Until Appraisal Issued

    Project-Specific Commercial General Liability Insurance

    Do We Need Blockchain in Construction?

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/27/21)

    A WARNing for Companies

    Cal/OSHA-Approved Changes to ETS Will Take Effect May 6, 2022

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    Several Lewis Brisbois Partners Recognized by Sacramento Magazine in List of Top Lawyers

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard

    Changes and Extra Work – Is There a Limit?
    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

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/10/24) – New Type of Nuclear Reactor, Big Money Surrounding Sports Stadiums, and Positivity from Fannie Mae’s Monthly Consumer Survey

    February 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, the commercial real estate market poses a risk to financial stability, New York City moves towards net-zero building emissions, workers at several Los Angeles area hotels tentatively agree to a new contract, and more! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    The American Rescue Plan Act: What Restaurants Need to Act on NOW

    March 22, 2021 —
    The American Rescue Plan Act (“Act”) was passed by the Senate over the weekend and passed by the House today. President Biden is set to sign the Act into law on Friday, March 12th. The Act has $1.9 Trillion in relief funds with $28.6 Billion set aside for the restaurant industry in the Restaurant Revitalization Fund (“Fund”). The Fund has apportioned funds into two funding groups; $5 Billion for restaurants with annual gross revenue under $500,000 and $23.6 Billion for restaurants over $500,000 in annual gross revenue. Differences from the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) This is a grant program with no loan documents or forgiveness applications. Instead, each restaurant entity can apply for and receive up to $10M in grant funds through the Act. The amount a restaurant receives is based on the sum of the restaurant’s gross revenue in 2019 minus the gross revenue in 2020 minus PPP and EIDL money received. For example, Restaurant A made $7M gross revenue in 2019, made $3M gross revenue in 2020 and received $1M in PPP and EIDL combined. ($7M - $3M -$1M =$3M) The restaurant will receive $3M in grant funds directly from the SBA (as long as funds are available). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Krueger, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Krueger may be contacted at michael.krueger@ndlf.com

    A Property Tax Exemption, Misapplied, in Texas

    June 18, 2019 —
    In an important ruling for Texas businesses, the Texas Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that the TCEQ misapplied the Texas property tax’s exemption for specified pollution control equipment. Since 1993, the Texas Constitution has included a provision which authorizes the Texas Legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation “all or part of real and personal property used … wholly or partly … for the control or reduction of air, water or land pollution.” This provision is implemented by Section 11.31 of the Texas Tax Code, which is administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. (See the rules at Title 30, Chapter 17 of the Texas Administrative Code.) If the Executive Director of the TCEQ determines that the equipment is used wholly or partly for pollution control, he issues a “positive use determination”; in the event it does not, the Executive Director issues a “negative use determination and rejects the application for the exemption. In 2007, Section 11.31 was amended at 11.31 (k) to list several items of equipment that are presumed to be pollution-control equipment, including “heat recovery steam generators” or HRSGs. This equipment is used by powerplants to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions that are the product of generation of electricity. Several applications were submitted to the TCEQ by the Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, seeking a tax exemption for its HRSG units. In July 2012, the TCEQ denied these applications, with the flat declaration that HRSGs are not pollution-control equipment—“they are used solely for production.” The Brazos Cooperative sued the Commission, and on May 3, 2019, in the case of Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. TCEQ, the Texas Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion reversing the Commission, and the lower court (the Eight Court of Appeals, sitting in El Paso) that affirmed the Commission’s action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Neither Designated Work Exclusion nor Pre-Existing Damage Exclusion Defeat Duty to Defend

    March 12, 2015 —
    A duty to defend existed for alleged construction defects despite the designated work exclusion and the pre-existing damage exclusion. Gemini Ins. Co. v. N. Am Capacity Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14836 (D. Nev. Feb. 6, 2015). Olsen Construction Company held three separate policies issued by Gemini from September 2002 to February 2005. North American issued a CGL policy to Olsen for the period February 2005 to February 2006. Olsen conducted repair work on decks at the location between 2002 and 2003. Olsen was sued for construction defects by the Homeowners' Association (HOA). Gemini defended and also tendered to North American. When North American refused the tender, Gemini sued for declaratory and equitable relief related to North American's duty to defend Olsen in the underlying case. North American moved for summary judgment. 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

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    July 09, 2014 —
    U.S. property owners with just one rental house can now get cash from Wall Street to buy more. Cerberus Capital Management LP, which initially targeted landlords with multimillion-dollar loans, is financing low-volume deals for small investors through its FirstKey Lending, with looser terms than government-backed mortgages from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, said Randy Reiff, the business’s chief executive officer. Blackstone Group LP (BX)’s rental lending arm, B2R Finance LP, is making a similar push to mom-and-pop landlords. “Our premise has always been to be able to lend to the middle market and entrepreneurial borrowers in the space, not just the institutional borrowers,” Reiff said. “The biggest guys have always enjoyed access to capital. The largest part of this market is really the entrepreneurial owners.” The companies are competing to lend to owners of the almost 14 million rental houses in the U.S. at a time when many Americans are struggling to get a mortgage and homeownership is declining. Cerberus and Blackstone, along with Colony Capital LLC, also are racing to package debt on homes managed by separate landlords for the first multiborrower bond sale. Ms. Perlberg may be contacted at hperlberg@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Perlberg and John Gittelsohn – Bloomberg

    “A No-Lose Proposition?”

    October 07, 2024 —
    A Miller Act payment bond surety and its principal general contractor both sued in federal court in New Orleans by a project subcontractor sought to compel arbitration the claims against both contractor and surety based on an indisputably enforceable arbitration clause in the subcontract. This was urged to avoid separate actions against the contractor (arbitration) and its surety (litigation), even though the surety was not a party to the subcontract and, therefore, not a party to the arbitration clause. In the face of the lack of an express agreement to arbitrate, the contractor and contractor argued that “no federal statute or policy prohibits all of Plaintiff’s claims from proceeding to arbitration….” Additionally, those parties urged that the surety should be allowed to affirmatively compel arbitration because the surety “would otherwise have the ability to assert the right to compel arbitration as a defense….” The New Orleans federal district court was unpersuaded:
    “[D]istrict courts within this circuit have recognized that ‘Miller Act claims by a subcontractor for unpaid labor and materials are separate and distinct from those for general breach of contract… [and] arbitration and Miller Act suits, are not, per se, inconsistent with one another.’…[A]bsent express contractual intent to subject Miller Act claims to arbitration, the court [will] not force the parties to arbitrate claims against nonparties to the contract at issue…. [C]laims against a surety, which was a non-signatory to the contract, would not be subject to arbitration without any contractual basis to do so.”
    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

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    May 16, 2022 —
    How much time do our clients have to bring a bad faith action against an insurer? Although we are not frequently asked this question, it is one that we constantly analyze before asserting a bad faith claim. To answer this question, we look to the statute of limitations, which is a law passed by a state legislative body that sets the maximum amount of time for a party to bring a claim based upon a particular cause of action. For policyholders, knowing which statute of limitations applies to their bad faith claim is critical because it indicates whether it is possible to initiate legal proceedings. In addition, it determines the amount in damages available in case of a successful resolution. Statute of Limitations in Breach of Contract vs. Tort Claims One key determinant of a statute of limitations for bad faith is whether the claim is brought as a tort or a breach of contract action. The consequence of framing bad faith as a tort is that a policyholder is not just limited to contract damages. The policyholder can also receive recourse for emotional distress, pain, suffering, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and other damages that the court may consider appropriate. Unfortunately, however, not every jurisdiction allows plaintiffs to bring bad faith actions as tort claims. While, for example, courts in California, Colorado, and Connecticut allow bad faith claims sounding in tort, courts in jurisdictions such as Tennessee do not. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anastasiya Collins, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Collins may be contacted at ACollins@sdvlaw.com

    Coverage Exists for Landlord as Additional Insured

    September 03, 2014 —
    The Indiana Court of Appeals determined the landlord was entitled to coverage as an additional insured under the tenant's policy. Selective Ins. Co. v. Erie Ins. Exch., 2014 Ind. App. LEXIS 365 (Ind. Ct. App. July 30, 2014). Rangeline, LLC owned a warehouse. Rangeline negotiated a lease with Hammons Storage to store insulation manufactured by Knauf Insulation. Pursuant to requirements in the lease, Hammons secured liability coverage with Erie Insurance naming Rangeline as an additional insured. After Hammons moved insulation into the warehouse for storage, the pipes of the sprinkler system burst, causing damage to the insulation. The cause of the loss was determined to be water from the system freezing, which led to the cast iron fittings cracking, causing the failure of the sprinkler heads. 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