BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window 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


    Remodel Leaves Guitarist’s Home Leaky and Moldy

    Insurer’s Broad Duty to Defend in Oregon, and the Recent Ruling in State of Oregon v. Pacific Indemnity Company

    Homeowner's Claim for Collapse Survives Summary Judgment

    Court Adopts Magistrate's Recommendation to Deny Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    San Francisco Law Firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Hired New Partner

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    What Buyers Want in a Green Home—and What They Don’t

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Construction Litigation Group Listed in U.S. News Top Tier

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    Remembering Joseph H. Foster

    Subcontractor Strength Will Drive Industry’s Ability to Meet Demand, Overcome Challenges

    Not to Miss at This Year’s Archtober Festival

    New Jersey Appeals Court Ruled Suits Stand Despite HOA Bypassing Bylaw

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    Virginia Chinese Drywall “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and number of “occurrences”

    Settlement Reached on Troubled Harbor Bridge in Corpus Christi, Texas

    A Contractual Liability Exclusion Doesn't Preclude Insurer's Duty to Indemnify

    White Collar Overtime Regulations Temporarily Blocked

    Contractors Board May Discipline Over Workers’ Comp Reporting

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    Hamptons Home Up for Foreclosure That May Set Record

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

    Meet Daniel Hall, Assistant Professor at TU Delft

    Court Voids Settlement Agreement in Construction Defect Case

    SB 721 – California Multi-Family Buildings New Require Inspections of “EEEs”

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    Ambiguous Application Questions Preclude Summary Judgment on Rescission Claim

    Subsequent Owners of Homes Again Have Right to Sue Builders for Construction Defects

    EPA Looks to Reduce Embodied Carbon in Materials With $160M in Grants

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s One, Two… Eight Strikes: You’re Out!”

    NY Court Holds Excess Liability Coverage Could Never be Triggered Where Employers’ Liability Policy Provided Unlimited Insurance Coverage

    Questions of Fact Regarding Collapse of Basement Walls Prevent Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    Outcry Over Peru’s Vast Graft Probe Prompts Top Lawyer to Quit

    No Repeal Process for Rejected Superstorm Sandy Grant Applications

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    Recent Developments in Legislative Efforts To Combat Climate Change

    Consolidated Case With Covered and Uncovered Allegations Triggers Duty to Defend

    Protecting and Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien when the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    Housing Buoyed by 20-Year High for Vet’s Loans: Mortgages

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    No Duty to Defend Under Renter's Policy

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    New Jersey Senate Advances Bad Faith Legislation

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    No Indemnity After Insured Settles Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability Claims

    Federal Court Sets High Bar for Pleading Products Liability Cases in New Jersey
    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

    New WA Law Caps Retainage on Private Projects at 5%

    May 29, 2023 —
    This month, Governor Jay Inslee signed into law a new statute that caps retainage on private construction projects to five percent (5%), provides a mechanism for subcontractors to get paid their retainage prior to project completion, and allows for contractors and subcontractors to post a retainage bond and get paid their retainage early. For those interested in reading the full text of this new law, the statute can be found here. The new statute goes into effect on July 23, 2023. Under the statute, when a contractor or subcontractor considers their work under a contract subject to retainage complete, they may notify the party they contracted to perform the work for. Within 15 days of receiving the notice of completion of work, the party receiving the notice must respond with either (1) notice of acceptance of work or (2) notice of uncompleted items to the contractor or subcontractor. If the party receiving notice does not provide notice of uncompleted items within 15 days or fails to respond to the notice of completion entirely, the unpaid retainage will begin to accrue interest at a rate of one percent (1%) per month, 30 days after the initial 15-day period. However, this interest will not accrue against a contractor who has not been paid the retainage by an upper-tier contractor or owner until payment has been received, so long as that contractor has submitted its subcontractor’s notice of completion to the upper-tier contractor or owner within 30 days of receipt. Reprinted courtesy of Brett M. Hill, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC and Ryanne S. Mathisen, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Mr. Hill may be contacted at brett.hill@acslawyers.com Ms. Mathisen may be contacted at ryanne.mathisen@acslawyers.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Great London Property Exodus Is in Reverse as Tenants Return

    June 06, 2022 —
    Tenants flocking to London are driving up rents in the capital, reversing the pandemic “race for space” and adding to the UK’s cost-of-living crisis. A record 30% of homes let in London this year went to people who previously lived outside the city, according to estate agent Hamptons. The surrounding areas of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent and Surrey –- known as the Home Counties – now account for more than half of tenants moving in. However, people are tending to move to London for lifestyle reasons rather than because they are being summoned back to the office, Hamptons said. Study and changes in family circumstances are often providing the trigger. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lizzy Burden, Bloomberg

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    June 07, 2021 —
    Recently, ransomware has taken to the forefront in national news. The most prevalent ransomware attack, the one perpetrated against Colonial Pipeline by the now-defunct "Dark Side" hackers, has served to remind businesses about the risks of ransomware. What happened to Colonial Pipeline? What should businesses do to learn from Colonial Pipeline's response? What should a business avoid? What happened to Colonial Pipeline? Colonial Pipeline, a Georgia based operator of fuel pipelines, had its billing software compromised by Dark Side's ransomware attack.1 Following this, Colonial Pipeline took proactive measures to (1) shut down their systems; (2) evaluate the issue; and (3) safely brought systems back on line after ensuring that they were not compromised. Following this, Colonial Pipeline did eventually pay the 4.4 million dollar ransom demand from Dark Side. What it got in return was a decryption key, as promised, which ended up being slower than Colonial Pipeline's own backups.2 The ultimate result of this event being an initial cost of $4.4 million, in addition to lost profits, additional security costs, reputational costs, and litigation costs as consumers had filed a class-action lawsuit to hold Colonial Pipeline accountable for their perceived lapse in security.3 Further, the fall-out from Colonial Pipeline had prompted additional cybersecurity efforts and changes by the Biden administration, including proposed regulations requiring pipeline companies to inform the Department of Homeland Security of cybersecurity incidents within 12 hours, in addition to keeping a cybersecurity coordinator on staff at all times, and reviews of current security measures. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of J. Kyle Janecek, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Janecek may be contacted at kyle.janecek@ndlf.com

    New Iowa Law Revises Construction Defects Statute of Repose

    September 07, 2017 —
    Starting July 1st of this year, Iowa homeowners now have only ten years to file a claim against the builder instead of the fifteen years that was allowed previously, reported WZAD 8 News. Furthermore, commercial property owners will only have eight years to file their suits. Scott Webster, Vice President of the Quad Cities Builders and Re-modelers Association, told WZAD 8 News that insurance companies played a part in the change: “[I]nsurance companies were saying, Iowa is at such a long period of time for any kind of defect, that may be hard to prove whether the builder even did it or the homeowner modified the house.” However, Tom Miller, Iowa Attorney General, disagreed with the change in policy: “We think that it’s unfair to consumers, the defects in buildings and commercial buildings too, can show up very easily between eight and fifteen years out.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    August 06, 2014 —
    The San Diego County Board of Supervisors is meeting today to discuss “proposed building code amendments designed to promote energy efficiency in new homes,” according to Times of San Diego. Possible recommendations include “install electrical panels large enough to accommodate future improvements; put in a conduit that could be used for future roof-mounted solar panels; reserve space on south-facing roofs where solar panels might be added later;” and others. If the recommendations are approved, the “staff would draft detailed building code amendments and return early next year to get them adopted.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alabama Still “An Outlier” on Construction Defects

    October 14, 2013 —
    While many state Supreme Courts have determined that faulty construction work can be an occurrence under a standard commercial liability policy, the Alabama Supreme Court has taken the contrary view. Writing on the Kilpatrick Townsend blog, Carl A. Salisbury and Edmund M. Kneisel point out that the decision makes Alabama “an outlier,” and they ask, “how much longer will the outliers hold out?” They note that in the underlying construction defect case, “the arbitrator awarded $3 million in compensatory damages to the homeowners because of improperly installed flashing; improperly installed brick; the lack of weep holes in the brick; improperly installed doors and windows; improper construction of the upper porches; faulty construction of the roof; improper installation of a bathtub.” They summarize: “the house must have leaked like a colander.” When the insurer denied coverage, the contractor sued. The insurer argued that “the CGL policy form does not cover construction-related acts or omissions because such acts are not an insured ‘occurrence.’” Mr. Salisbury and Mr. Kneisel point out that “the Alabama Supreme Court agreed.” The problem they see is that “if there is no insurance for any intentional act, then insurance is simply a rip-off — it covers nothing.” They quote Justice Benjamin Cardozo to this effect: “To restrict insurance to cases where liability is incurred without fault of the insured would reduce indemnity to a shadow.” Their argument is that the Alabama decision was not the “correct position,” as exemplified by recent decisions from West Virginia, North Dakota, Connecticut and Georgia. The case “was a prime opportunity for the Alabama Supreme Court to leave the ranks of the outliers and join the majority view.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Replevin Actions: What You Should Know

    November 08, 2021 —
    A contractor client of White and Williams recently found itself in a prickly situation. They had default terminated a subcontractor on a major commercial project and withheld payment to that subcontractor on an outstanding invoice as permitted under the terms of the subcontract until the project was completed. Clearly irate over being terminated, the subcontractor walked-off of the project with thousands of dollars’ worth of project materials and equipment that had been paid for by the owner. While on some projects this may amount to nothing more than an annoyance or inconvenience, in this case it was a significant problem because some of the wrongfully removed materials were custom manufactured overseas and not easily replaceable. The client therefore needed to take immediate action to retrieve the stolen materials so that the project would not be delayed. Specifically, it needed to file a replevin action against the subcontractor. A replevin action is a little known but powerful area of the law. In its simplest terms, replevin is a procedure whereby seized goods may be provisionally restored to their owner pending the outcome of an action to determine the rights of the parties concerned. The requirements of a replevin action differ by jurisdiction. For example, in Pennsylvania, the Rules of Civil Procedure devote an entire section to replevin actions and spell out in precise detail the steps that must be taken. While you should be sure to strictly comply with the rules in your jurisdiction, here are a few general points to keep in mind:
    • Where to File: A replevin action is typically commenced by filing a complaint in the appropriate jurisdiction. Generally speaking, it is best to file the action in the jurisdiction where the improperly seized materials are being held. If that location is unknown, you can also typically file the action in the jurisdiction where the project is located.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig H. O'Neill, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    Consequential Damage Claims for Insurer's Bad Faith Dismissed

    April 22, 2019 —
    Partial dismissal of the insured's complaint seeking consequential damages for the insurer's bad faith was granted by the court. Bryant v. General Cas. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15369 (N.D. N.Y. Jan. 30, 2019). Bryant purchased from General Casualty Company of Wisconsin (GCCW) a commercial property and casualty policy to cover the insured premises. While the building was rented to a tenant who operated a restaurant, it sustained a collapse. GCCW refused to cover the loss. Bryant sued. In addition to the cost of repairing and replacing the damage to the property, Bryant alleged he was out the value of rental revenue from his tenant, which was forced to close the restaurant and relocated as a result of the unrepaired damage. 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