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


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

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    The NAR asks FAA to Amend their Drone Rules for Real Estate Use

    School District Practice Bulletin: Loose Lips Can Sink More Than Ships

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Savera Sandhu Joins Newmeyer Dillion As Partner

    Sellers' Alleged Misrepresentation Does Not Amount To An Occurrence

    Look Up And Look Out: Increased Antitrust Enforcement Of Horizontal No-Poach Agreements Signals Heightened Scrutiny Of Vertical Agreements May Be Next

    CGL Coverage Dispute Regarding the (J)(6) And (J)(7) Property Damage Exclusions

    Court of Appeals Invalidates Lien under Dormancy Clause

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    Court of Federal Claims: Upstream Hurricane Harvey Case Will Proceed to Trial

    It Was a Wild Week for Just About Everyone. Ok, Make that Everyone.

    Court Grants Motion to Dismiss Negligence Claim Against Flood Insurer

    Insurer Prohibited from Bringing Separate Contribution Action in Subrogation to Rights of Suspended Insured

    AGC Seeks To Lead Industry in Push for Infrastructure Bill

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    Another Smart Home Innovation: Remote HVAC Diagnostics

    Miller Act CLAIMS: Finding Protections and Preserving Your Rights

    Residential Interior Decorator Was Entitled to Lien and Was Not Engaging in Unlicensed Contracting

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (08/15/23) – Manufacturing Soars with CHIPS Act, New Threats to U.S. Infrastructure and AI Innovation for One Company

    Construction Defect Settlement in Seattle

    Discovery Requests in Bad Faith Litigation Considered by Court

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Gillotti v. Stewart (2017) 2017 WL 1488711 Rejects Liberty Mutual, Holding Once Again that the Right to Repair Act is the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Deductibles Limited to Number of Suits Filed Against Insured, Not Number of Actual Plaintiffs

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    Will Superusers Future-Proof the AEC Industry?

    CDJ’s #5 Topic of the Year: Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, et al.

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

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

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    Insurers in New Jersey Secure a Victory on Water Damage Claims, But How Big a Victory Likely Remains to be Seen

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Contractual Indemnification Limitation on Florida Public Projects

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    South African Building Industry in Line for More State Support

    Seattle Condos, Close to Waterfront, Construction Defects Included

    Sanctions of $1.6 Million Plus Imposed on Contractor for Fabricating Evidence

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office Obtains Major Victory in Arbitration!

    Trump Tower Is Now One of NYC’s Least-Desirable Luxury Buildings

    Miorelli Doctrine’s Sovereign Immunity in Public Construction Contracts — Not the Be-All and End-All

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    Repair of Fractured Girders Complete at Shuttered Salesforce Transit Center

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Leveraging from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Fairfield's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    April 06, 2016 —
    Payment clauses in California construction contracts are often complex and multi-layered. This is especially true in contracts between general contractors and their subcontractors. The general does not want to pay the subs until it receives funding from the owners. The subs, of course, want their progress and final payments as soon as possible. Up until 1997, two different payment provisions were used in California contracts to manage payments by a general to its subcontractors. The first was called a “pay if paid” clause, and provided a contractor did not have to pay its subcontractors for work performed unless the subcontractor was first paid by the owner of the project. The second was the “pay when paid clause.” It required subcontractors to be paid for their work after the general was paid by the owner, or within “a reasonable time” after the subcontractors finished their work if the owner did not pay the general. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    December 01, 2017 —
    Contractors will soon find themselves on the frontline of wage disputes on projects if laborers working on behalf of their subcontractors or vendors are unpaid. On October 14, 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 1701, which will allow laborers to seek direct compensation from the general contractors on private projects, if their wages remain unpaid. The legislative mandate requires direct contractors—defined as contractors who have a direct contractual relationship with an owner—to assume liability for any debt incurred by a subcontractor, at any tier, for a wage claimant’s performance of labor included in the subject of the original contract between the general contractor and the owner. The California bill will apply to all private construction contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2018. Previously, all laborers could maintain a mechanic’s lien claim against private property, without needing to serve a 20-day preliminary notice, but there was no statutory obligation on the “direct contractors” to reimburse the laborers their unpaid wages. Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C. attorneys Alex Baghdassarian, Eric M. Gruzen and Kerri Sakaue Mr. Baghdassarian may be contacted at abaghdassarian@pecklaw.com Mr. Gruzen may be contacted at egruzen@pecklaw.com Ms. Sakaue may be contacted at ksakaue@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Conscious Builder – Interview with Casey Grey

    February 16, 2017 —
    In this podcast interview, Casey Grey talks about Conscious Building, passive houses, and and how we can make our homes healthier. About Casey Grey Casey Grey is the founder and CEO of The Conscious Builder Inc., an Ontario company. Casey is one of those very few people who knew what he wanted from a very young age. Although his goals have changed over the years, they have always revolved around building homes. From Lego, to tree houses to custom homes, he is constantly looking for ways to build better homes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Appraisal Can Go Forward Prior to Resolution of Coverage Dispute

    April 08, 2024 —
    The Florida Supreme Court found that a trial court could compel an appraisal of the insured's loss prior to resolving coverage issues. Am. Coastal Ins. Co. v. San Marco Villas Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 2024 Fla. LEXIS 185 (Fla. Feb. 1, 2024). Hurricane Irma damaged San Marco Condominium Association's buildings. American Coastal paid $192,629.75 for the loss. San Marco estimated the damage to be in excess of eight million dollars. San Marco demanded an appraisal under the policy. American Coastal refused to submit to appraisal because it was premature as its investigation was still ongoing. San Marco sued American Coastal and asked the court to compel appraisal. American Coastal argued that San Marco had committed fraud or had made material misrepresentations regarding its claim. The trial court heard San Marco's appraisal motion and entered an order compelling appraisal. American Coastal appealed, bu the Second District Court affirmed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Louisiana Court Holds That Application of Pollution Exclusion Would Lead to Absurd Results

    October 21, 2019 —
    A Louisiana court recently denied an excess insurer’s bid for summary judgment, finding that the insurer’s interpretation of a pollution exclusion would lead to “absurd results.” Central Crude, Inc., a crude oil transporter company, experienced an oil pipeline leak, allegedly causing damage to property belonging to Columbia Gas Transmission Company. Columbia Gas sued Central Crude seeking compensatory damages and injunctive relief to compel remediation of the site. Central Crude sought coverage under a CGL primary insurance policy issued by Liberty Mutual. The insurer initially agreed to cover Central Crude’s “reasonable and necessary costs” relating to the incident, but later refused to defend or indemnify Central Crude for any costs incurred from the incident. As a result, Central Crude brought suit against Liberty Mutual and its excess insurer, Great American, to enforce coverage. Great American moved for summary judgment arguing coverage was excluded by the excess policy’s pollution exclusion, which precludes coverage for injury “arising out of a discharge of pollutants.” Central Crude responded arguing that the exclusion’s applicability was invalidated or at least rendered ambiguous by the Following Form Endorsements, which reflect an intent to mirror the coverage afforded under the primary Liberty Mutual policy, and because coverage appears to be specifically authorized through the Premises Operations Liability Endorsement. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Daniel Hentschel, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Event-Cancellation Insurance Issues During a Pandemic

    September 07, 2020 —
    As the effects of coronavirus continue, organizations and companies now are considering whether events in late 2020 and early 2021 can take place or need to be converted to virtual events. What insurance effects will those changes and cancellations have? Consideration of these important decisions requires a review of both event-cancellation insurance and a consideration of force majeure and other such issues. On the insurance front, years ago, many policyholders purchased event-cancellation insurance for events in 2020, 2021, and even as far out as 2024. Such policies, purchased before the middle of March 2020, generally contain explicit coverage “buy-backs” for losses from “communicable disease.” That is, the policyholders paid an extra, specifically identified premium to remove any exclusion for communicable disease from these policies. Typically, these policies do not use the word, “virus”, but rather use “communicable disease”; and exclude neither. Those policies typically cover a specified amount of net profit and include additional coverages for “Cost of Remedial Action”, “Future Marketing Expense”, etc., over and above that specified amount of coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Latosha M. Ellis, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Ms. Ellis may be contacted at lellis@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    May 07, 2014 —
    The insurer's attempt to dismiss the insured's multi-count complaint for failure to provide full coverage for flood damage failed. Ragusa Corp. v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40812 (D. Conn. March 27, 2014). The insureds' house suffered significant damage due to flood associated with Hurricane Irene. The insureds submitted a claim. Standard Fire paid $35,216.75, well below what the insureds thought they were owed. The insureds returned the check and demanded what they believed was full payment. The insureds demanded an appraisal because the parties did not agree on the amount being paid under the policy, including disagreement about the amount owed for items that both sides agreed were covered under the policy. Standard Fire refused to participate in an appraisal. The insureds ended up suing Standard Fire, alleging, among other things, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. 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

    Chinese Demand Rush for Australia Homes to Stay, Ausin Says

    August 06, 2014 —
    Ausin Group (Finance) Pty, which offers property and mortgage broking in Australia to Chinese buyers, expects to sell two-thirds more homes and to double the amount of loans it arranges as demand from the mainland surges. The company forecasts A$1.5 billion ($1.4 billion) in sales of new residential properties in the year ending June 30, compared with A$900 million over the previous 12 months, Sydney-based Managing Director Joseph Zaja said in an interview yesterday. The value of mortgages the closely held company arranges through Australian banks is expected to climb to A$500 million in the 2015 calendar year, he said. Ausin is benefiting from surging demand from China, where the housing market is faltering. Chinese purchasers overtook Americans to become the biggest buyers of real estate in Australia in the 12 months through June 2013, plowing A$5.9 billion into commercial and residential property, a 42 percent increase from the previous 12 months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nichola Saminather, Bloomberg
    Ms. Saminather may be contacted at nsaminather1@bloomberg.net