BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut civil engineer expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failure
    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


    The Families First Coronavirus Response Act: What Every Employer Should Know

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    Stair Collapse Points to Need for Structural Inspections

    Home Buyer Disclosures, What’s Required and What Isn’t

    DC Circuit Rejects Challenge to EPA’s CERCLA Decision Regarding Hardrock Mining Industry

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

    BHA at the 10th Annual Construction Law Institute, Orlando

    No Conflict in Successive Representation of a Closely-Held Company and Its Insiders Where Insiders Already Possess Company’s Confidential Information

    General Indemnity Agreement Can Come Back to Bite You

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    Hawaii Federal District Court Rejects Bad Faith Claim

    Georgia Supreme Court Limits Damages Under Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act

    Previously Owned U.S. Home Sales Rise to Eight-Month High

    San Francisco International Airport Reaches New Heights in Sustainable Project Delivery

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    Evolving Climate Patterns and Extreme Weather Demand New Building Methods

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Skyline Bling: A $430 Million Hairpin Tower and Other Naked Bids for Tourism

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    MapLab: Why More Americans Are Moving Toward Wildfire

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

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    The Connecticut Appellate Court Decides That Construction Contractor Was Not Obligated To Continue Accelerated Schedule to Mitigate Its Damages Following Late Delivery of Materials by Supplier

    Traub Lieberman Recognized in 2022 U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms”

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/26/23) – The Energy Transition and a Bit of Brick-and-Mortar Blues

    Licensing Mistakes That Can Continue to Haunt You

    Congress Relaxes Several PPP Loan Requirements

    Eight Ways to Protect a Construction Company Before a Claim Is Filed

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Construction Robots 2023

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms Eight-Year Limit on Construction Defect Lawsuits

    SEC Climate Change Disclosure Letter Foreshadows Anticipated Regulatory Changes

    Traub Lieberman Partner Jonathan Harwood Obtains Summary Judgment Determining Insurer Has No Duty to Defend or Indemnify

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Texas Considers a Quartet of Construction Bills

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Waive Not, Want Not: Waivers and Releases on California Construction Projects

    Options When there is a Construction Lien on Your Property

    Breath of Fresh Air

    Product Liability Alert: Evidence of Apportionment of Fault Admissible in Strict Products Liability Action

    How U.S. Design and Architecture Firms Can Profit from the Chinese Market and Avoid Pitfalls

    Client Alert: Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Status as Undocumented Alien to Prospective Jury Panel Grounds for Mistrial

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    Construction Job Opening Rise in October

    Burg Simpson to Create Construction Defect Group
    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

    Value in Recording Lien within Effective Notice of Commencement

    August 03, 2020 —
    Construction lien priority is no joke! This is why a lienor wants to record its construction lien within an effective notice of commencement. A lien recorded within an effective notice of commencement relates back in time from a priority standpoint to the date the notice of commencement was recorded. A lienor that records a lien wants to ensure its lien is superior, and not inferior, to other encumbrances. An inferior lien or encumbrance may not provide much value if there is not sufficient equity in the property. Plus, an inferior lien or encumbrance can be foreclosed. An example of the importance of lien priority can be found in the recent decision of Edward Taylor Corp. v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 45 Fla.L.Weekly D1447b (Fla. 2d DCA 2020). In this case, a contractor recorded a notice of commencement for an owner. While an owner is required to sign the notice of commencement that the contractor usually records, in this case, the owner did not sign the notice of commencement. Shortly after, the owner’s lender recorded a mortgage and then had the owner sign a notice of commencement and this notice of commencement was also recorded. When there is a construction lender, the lender always wants to make sure its mortgage is recorded first—before any notice of commencement—for purposes of priority and has the responsibility to ensure the notice of commencement is recorded. Here, the lender apparently did not realize the contractor had already recorded a notice of commencement at the time it recorded its mortgage. 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

    Calling the Shots

    May 03, 2021 —
    As of 2019, women accounted for 10% of the total construction workforce. That’s 1.2 million women in the field, sculpting the built environment and calling the shots. A smaller percentage of the industry’s population does not mean less ability to achieve success. According to The National Association of Women in Construction, 44% of women in construction serve in a professional and management capacity. As the pandemic lingers on, sourcing qualified candidates is becoming more difficult, and finding nuanced methods of retaining valuable employees remains at the forefront of modern business. One estimate cites a loss of 600,000 women from the overall U.S. workforce in September 2020. However, data suggest that construction employment for women has remained steady, compared with struggling sectors such as retail and hospitality. Plus, salary disparities are becoming less prominent in the construction sector where, according to NAWIC, women earn 99.1% of what men make, and the female population has seen steady growth since 2012. Reprinted courtesy of Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/1/24) – Hybrid Work Technologies, AI in Construction and the Market for Office Buildings

    November 05, 2024 —
    In our latest roundup, commercial mortgage bond market in trouble, commercial real estate investments, pressure on mortgage REITs, and more!
    • Short-term issues facing U.S. commercial real estate have made it an investment opportunity and values have bottomed out. (CNBC)
    • As organizations report plans to shake up their real estate portfolios, the flight to quality spurs interest in space planning, amenities and hybrid work technologies. (Joe Burns, Facilities Dive)
    • The conversation about AI’s potential benefits and risks has been a common refrain in construction recently. (Matthew Thibault, Construction Dive)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    December 31, 2014 —
    Construction projects pose unique challenges, including keeping costs within budget, meeting project deadlines, and coordinating the work of numerous contractors and subcontractors in the wake of inevitable design revisions and changes to the plans. Anticipating potential project challenges and negotiating contract provisions before commencing work on a project is critical for all parties. Careful planning should reduce the number of contract disputes. This, in turn, can facilitate the completion of a project within budget and on schedule. “Changes” Clauses in Construction Contracts Most commercial construction contracts have a clause addressing changes to the contract. A “changes” clause typically requires the mutual agreement of the parties on the scope of any modifications to the contract, as well as the effect on the contract price and timeframe for the work to be performed. This results in what is generally referred to as a “change order.” Many projects have a large number of change orders, which can result in significant cost overruns and delays to the project if the contract contains a complicated change order process. Therefore, in order to minimize cost overruns and project delays, it is crucial to keep the change order process as simplified and streamlined as possible. In the most basic terms, change orders memorialize modifications to the original contract, and typically alter the contract's price, scope of work, and/or completion dates. A typical change order is a written document prepared by the owner or its design professional, and signed by the owner, design professional, and affected contractors and subcontractors. An executed change order indicates the parties’ agreement as to what changes are taking place, including approval for additional costs and schedule impacts. While the reasons for change orders and the parties initiating them may vary, all change orders have one feature in common. Effective change orders alter the original contract and become part of the contract. Therefore, from a legal standpoint, change orders must be approached with the same caution and forethought as the original contract. Practice Pointers for Change Orders In light of the foregoing, some practice pointers for change orders in commercial construction contracts are as follows:
    • Carefully Negotiate and Draft Change Order Provisions in the Original Contract. A carefully negotiated and drafted “changes” clause that accounts for “unexpected circumstances” or “hidden conditions” can protect the parties from downstream costly disputes.
    • Immediately Address Changes by Following the Change Order Process, Including Obtaining Necessary Signatures. Regardless if you are an owner, general contractor or subcontractor, you should address any proposed change order immediately. Even if a decision maker gives “verbal” approval to go ahead with changed work, the work should not proceed without following the change order process in the original contract. This includes making sure to obtain any necessary signatures for the change order, if at all possible.
    • Analyze the Plans and Specifications to Determine Whether “Changes” are Within the Scope of the Original Contract, or Whether They are Extra Work. Prior to entering an original contract, it is imperative that the parties review the plans and specifications for ambiguities regarding work included in the original contract, versus potential extra work that would require a change order. This is important because a careful review of the plans and specifications sometimes reveals that work believed to be a change order is, in fact, original work, or vice versa.
    • Make Sure Requests and Approvals for Change Orders are Done by an Authorized Representative. When a party requests or gives its approval to a change order, it is important to confirm the request or approval came from an authorized representative.
    • Avoid Vague and Open-Ended Change Orders. Indeed, the vaguer a change order, the more likely it can lead to a dispute. Vague and open-ended change orders, including change orders that provide for payment on a time and materials basis, can be difficult for an owner to budget and schedule. This can lead to disputes as to cost and/or time extensions.
    • Oral Assurances for Payment Without a Signed Change Order May Not Be Recoverable. When a party provides verbal assurances to another party for extra work without following the change order process, there is a much higher likelihood that disputes will occur. Although there is case law that may allow a contractor to recover for extra work in private contracts based on oral promises, the parties should avoid placing themselves in such a legal position. Notably, in public contracts, a contractor may not be able to recover for any extra work without a signed changed order, even with verbal assurances of payment from the owner.
    About the Author: John E. Bowerbank, Newmeyer & Dillion Mr. Bowerbank is a partner in the Newport Beach office and practices in the areas of business, insurance, real estate, and construction litigation. You can reach John at john.bowerbank@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    April 01, 2015 —
    The 22nd West Coast Casualty (WCC) Construction Defect Seminar returning to the Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim, California is just six weeks away. The annual event begins on Thursday, May 14th, with breakfast and registration starting at 7:30am. Panel discussions on various construction defect related topics begin at 8:30am and continue through the morning and afternoon, followed by a cocktail reception in the early evening. The following day includes break-out sessions with the event concluding in the afternoon. Attendees can enhance their seminar experience with the WCC Construction Defect Seminar Mobile App. The event schedule, speaker information, product information, sponsor details, and interactive floorplan can all be accessed through the app. Furthermore, registered attendees will have access to session presentations. The discounted, early registration ends April 15th, 2015. Download an Invitation and Register for the Event... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    November 17, 2016 —
    In a big win for policyholders, the Oregon Supreme Court recently ruled that that insurance companies are not allowed to relitigate the nature of damages awarded against their insureds during an underlying trial. In a coverage dispute stemming from a contractor’s faulty work on a condominium development, the insurer argued that at least a portion of the damages awarded represented the cost of repairing the contractor’s own work product. Coverage for such damages would be explicitly excluded by the policy. However, the Oregon Supreme Court found that the jury had been instructed that it could not award damages for the contractor’s own faulty workmanship. The court declined to give the insurer a chance to attempt to reclassify the nature of these damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Austin D. Moody, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Moody may be contacted at adm@sdvlaw.com

    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    August 03, 2020 —
    In Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc. (No. E068353, filed 6/10/20), a California appeals court reversed the denial of an equitable subrogation claim for reimbursement of defense costs from contractually obligated subcontractors to a defending insurer, finding that all of the elements for equitable subrogation were met, and the equities tipped in favor of the insurer. After defending the general contractor, Pulte, in two construction defect actions as an additional insured on a subcontractor’s policy, St. Paul sought reimbursement of defense costs solely on an equitable subrogation theory against six subcontractors that had worked on the underlying construction projects, and whose subcontracts required them to defend Pulte in suits related to their work. After a bench trial, the trial court denied St. Paul’s claim, concluding that St. Paul had not demonstrated that it was fair to shift all of the defense costs to the subcontractors because their failure to defend Pulte had not caused the homeowners to bring the construction defect actions. The appeals court reversed, holding that the trial court misconstrued the law governing equitable subrogation. Because the relevant facts were not in dispute, the appeals court reviewed the case de novo and found that the trial court committed error in its denial of reimbursement for the defense fees. The appeals court found two errors: First, the trial court incorrectly concluded that equitable subrogation requires shifting of the entire loss. Second, the trial court applied a faulty causation analysis – that because the non-defending subcontractors had not caused the homeowners to sue Pulte, thereby necessitating a defense, St. Paul could not meet the elements of equitable subrogation. 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

    No Coverage for Additional Insured

    December 17, 2015 —
    Two insurers disputed who was responsible for coverage the additional insured contractor. Endurance Am. Spec. Ins. Co. v. Century Sur. Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19194 (2nd Cir. Nov. 4, 2015). The district court granted summary judgment to Endurance, finding there was coverage for the additional insured general contractor after being sued by an employee of a subcontractor. Century's policy included an Action Over Exclusion clause, which excluded insurance coverage for injury to certain employees as follows: Exclusions: . . . e. Employer's Liability "Bodily injury" to: (1) an "employee" of the named insured arising out of and in the course of:
    • (a) Employment by the named insured; or
    • (b) Performing duties related to the conduct of the named insured's business.
    The named insured was Pinnacle Construction & Renovation Corp. 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