BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/30/22) – Proptech Trends, Green Construction, and Sustainable Buildings

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Endorsements Do Not Exclude Coverage for Wrongful Death Claim

    “Made in America Week” Highlights Requirements, Opportunities for Contractors and Suppliers

    New York vs. Miami: The $50 Million Penthouse Battle From Zaha Hadid

    Engineer at Flint Negligence Trial Details Government Water Errors

    Breaking with Tradition, The Current NLRB is on a Rulemaking Tear: Election Procedures, Recognition Bar, and 9(a) Collective Bargaining Relationships

    Update to Washington State Covid-19 Guidance

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    Texas Federal Court Delivers Another Big Win for Policyholders on CGL Coverage for Construction-Defect Claims and “Rip-and-Tear” Damages

    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    Congratulations to Partner Nicole Whyte on Receiving the Marcus M. Kaufman Jurisprudence Award

    The Impact of the IIJA and Amended Buy American Act on the Construction Industry

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    Nonparty Discovery in California Arbitration: How to Get What You Want

    How SmartThings Wants to Automate Your Home

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

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Florida Chinese drywall, pollution exclusion, “your work” exclusion, and “sistership” exclusion.

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    Tension Over Municipal Gas Bans Creates Uncertainty for Real Estate Developers

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

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

    Construction Lien Does Not Include Late Fees Separate From Interest

    California Fears El Nino's Dark Side Will Bring More Trouble

    Handshake Deals Gone Wrong

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    The Future of Construction Defects in Utah Unclear

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    The Sounds of Silence: Pennsylvania’s Sutton Rule

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives “Tier 1” Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Traub Lieberman Senior Trial Counsel Timothy McNamara Wins Affirmation of Summary Judgment Denial

    Delaware Supreme Court Won’t Halt Building

    Challenging a Termination for Default

    User Interface With a Building – Interview with Esa Halmetoja of Senate Properties

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Is it the End of the Lease-Leaseback Shootouts? Maybe.

    South African Building Industry in Line for More State Support

    Zombie Foreclosures Plaguing Various Cities in the U.S.

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

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    Seattle’s Tallest Tower Said Readying to Go On the Market

    ASCE and Accelerator for America Release Map to Showcase Projects from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

    In Contracts, One Word Makes All the Difference

    Massive Danish Hospital Project Avoids Fire Protection Failures with Imerso Construction AI

    Insurance Law Alert: Ambiguous Producer Agreement Makes Agent-Broker Status a Jury Question
    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. Drawing 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

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    August 30, 2017 —
    On August 9th, in Sirrah Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Wunderlich, the Arizona Supreme Court settled the question about recovery of attorneys’ fees after prevailing on implied warranty claims against a residential contractor. The simple answer is, yes, a homeowner who prevails on the merits can recover the fees they spent to prove that shoddy construction breached the implied warranty of workmanship and habitability. Why? Because, as Justice Timmer articulated, “[t]he implied warranty is a contract term.” Although implied, the warranty is legally part of the written agreement in which “a residential builder warrants that its work is performed in a workmanlike manner and that the structure is habitable.” In other words, a claim based on the implied warranty not only arises out of the contract, the claim is actually based on a contract term. Since, in A.R.S. § 12-341.01, Arizona law provides for prevailing parties to recover their fees on claims “arising out of contract” and because the implied warranty is now viewed by the courts as a contract term, homeowners can recover their fees after successfully proving breach of the implied warranty. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rick Erickson, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr Erickson may be contacted at rerickson@swlaw.com

    Other Colorado Cities Looking to Mirror Lakewood’s Construction Defect Ordinance

    October 22, 2014 —
    The Denver Post reported that some Colorado metro communities “say they are ready to take a hard look at modifying Colorado's law on builder defects, which they blame for hampering new condominium construction amid the buildout of the region's 122-mile commuter-rail system.” Lone Tree has “scheduled a study session for Tuesday to discuss drafting its own construction-defects ordinance while a city councilmember in Englewood has put in a request that the city take up the topic.” According to the Denver Post, “Brighton, Broomfield and Centennial…also want to give the issue more attention.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    July 19, 2017 —
    In Duarte v. Pacific Specialty Ins. (No. A143828; filed 6/12/17, ord. pub. 6/29/17) a California appeals court held that an insurer was not entitled to summary judgment on its rescission claim because the disputed questions in the insurance application were ambiguous. In Duarte, the insured/owner purchased a tenant-occupied property in Oakland. Several years later the tenant’s daughter moved in, and continued living there after the tenant died. The insured/owner served the daughter with an eviction notice and shortly thereafter applied for Owners, Landlords & Tenants (“OLT”) liability coverage. The tenant/daughter responded to the eviction notice by filing a habitability lawsuit, claiming emotional distress and physical injury, among other things. The insurer denied coverage and a defense, drawing a bad faith lawsuit for failure to defend and “wrongful cancellation” of the policy. The insurer answered and raised rescission as an affirmative defense, based on alleged fraud and misrepresentation in the OLT policy application. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Don’t Fall in Trap of Buying the Cheapest Insurance Policy as it May be Bad for Your Business Risks and Needs

    March 25, 2024 —
    Don’t fall in the trap of buying the cheapest insurance policy. It will come and bite you in the butt big time! Consult with an insurance broker that understands construction and, importantly, your specific industry, to provide you coverage within your industry. Otherwise, you’ll be paying for a policy that may (i) not be a good policy, and (ii) may provide you minimal to no value for your industry’s RISKS and NEEDS when factoring in exclusions. When procuring insurance, think of the old adage “penny wise and pound foolish,” and don’t make decisions that fit within this adage! The recent decision in Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Pinnacle Engineering & Development, Inc., 2024 WL 940527 (S.D. Fla. 2024) serves as an example. Here, a subcontractor was hired by a general contractor to perform underground utility work for a townhome development which consisted of 57 townhome units included in 18 detached structures. The subcontractor’s underground work was defective which caused damage to the property’s water line, sewer system, plumbing lines, pavers, etc. The general contractor was liable to the owner for this defective work. Although the general contractor was an additional insured under the subcontractor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy, the subcontractor’s CGL carrier denied the duty to defend and initiated an insurance coverage lawsuit. Motions for summary judgment were filed. 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

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    July 03, 2022 —
    The Fourth Circuit upheld the district court's decision that a collapse was covered, but reversed the denial of treble damages to the insured. DENC, LLC v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 10443 (4th Cir. April 18, 2022). The district court decision was summarized here. DENC owned The Crest, an apartment building leased to Elon University for student housing. Philadelphia Indemnity Company insured the property. In January 2018, students gathered on a second-floor breezeway for a party. Partygoers began jumping in the breezeway, which caused an abrupt collapse. Observers noticed that the breezeway was hanging down by more that a foot. DENC filed a claim with Philadelphia the next day. An adjuster was sent to inspect the breezeway. By that time, the city had condemned The Crest. The adjuster said that undiscovered "water damage which occurred over an extended period of time" caused the loss. 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

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    December 16, 2023 —
    Introduction In a matter of “first impression,” on November 30, 2023, the Appellate Division affirmed the New Jersey Superior Court decision in Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Pennsauken Joint Venture v. Township of Pennsauken and Terminal Construction Corp., finding that the New Jersey Public Works Contractor Registration Act, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56.48 to -56.57 (“PWCRA” or the “Act”), applies to a joint venture formed for the sole purpose of bidding on a public works contract. Therefore, the Court held that the PWCRA requires any joint venture bidding on public works projects in New Jersey to be registered under the Act at the time of bid submission. Accordingly, the Township of Pennsauken acted within its authority and properly rejected the bid submission of the Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Joint Venture which was not registered under the Act in the name of the joint venture at the time of its bid submission, despite the individual members of the joint venture being registered. Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas J. Zaita, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Brian Glicos, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Zaita may be contacted at nzaita@pecklaw.com Mr. Glicos may be contacted at bglicos@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    February 18, 2015 —
    A recent article in the Construction Executive discussed the importance of preserving your claim, both in terms of timeliness of submitting your claim and making sure that you aren’t waiving portions of your claim when executing releases. These are all excellent points and bear some follow-up. Timing Your Claim I often review construction contracts that contain deadlines by which claims must be submitted. It may seem counter intuitive to think that you need to submit a claim when you are discussing the basis for the claim with an upstream contractor or the owner. But, there are more cases than I care to count where a contractor’s claim has been denied because the claim was not timely submitted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    CA Supreme Court: Right to Repair Act (SB 800) is the Exclusive Remedy for Residential Construction Defect Claims – So Now What?

    January 31, 2018 —
    A torrent of alerts have been flooding e-mail inboxes regarding the California Supreme Court’s decision in McMillin v. Superior Court, to reverse the Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) case, but with little discussion about the practical effects of the ruling. This alert will discuss how this ruling affects litigation of SB 800 Claims and Builders. Background on Liberty Mutual Case In 2002, the California Legislature enacted comprehensive construction defect litigation reform referred to as the Right to Repair Act (the “Act”). Among other things, the Act establishes standards for residential dwellings, and creates a prelitigation process that allows builders an opportunity to cure the construction defects before being sued. Since its enactment, however, the Act’s application has been up for debate. Most notably, in Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013), the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District held the Act was the exclusive remedy only in instances where the defects caused only economic loss, and that homeowners could pursue other remedies in situations where the defects caused actual property damage or personal injuries. Reprinted courtesy of Steve Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Omar Parra, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com Mr. Parra may be contacted at oparra@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of