BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut building expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code 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


    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Brazil Builder Bondholders Burned by Bribery Allegations

    Good-To-Know Points Regarding (I) Miller Act Payment Bonds And (Ii) Payment Bond Surety Compelling Arbitration

    Saudi Prince’s Megacity Shows Signs of Life

    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Common Law Indemnity Claim Affirmed on Justifiable Beliefs

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Good Indoor Air Quality Keeps Workers Healthy and Happy

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

    Australia Warns of Multi-Billion Dollar Climate Disaster Costs

    General Contractor’s Ability to Supplement Subcontractor Per Subcontract

    Ambitious Building Plans in Boston

    Insurer Must Defend General Contractor

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    A Reminder to Get Your Contractor’s License in Virginia

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    San Diego Appellate Team Prevails in Premises Liability Appeal

    Flint Water Crisis Prompts Call for More Federal Oversight

    As Single-Family Homes Get Larger, Lots Get Smaller

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Toronto Skyscraper With $1.2 Billion of Debt Has Been Put in Receivership

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    9 Positive Housing Statistics by Builder

    Another Reminder that Your Construction Contract Language Matters

    Distressed Home Sales Shrinking

    Sustainable, Versatile and Resilient: How Mass Timber Construction Can Shake Up the Building Industry

    Green Home Predictions That Are Best Poised to Come True in 2014 and Beyond (guest post)

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    Your Work Exclusion Applies to Damage to Tradesman's Property, Not Damage to Other Property

    Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Lease Terms Bar Landlord’s Carrier From Subrogating Against Commercial Tenant

    Breath of Fresh Air

    John Aho: Engineer Pushed for Seismic Safety in Alaska Ahead of 2018 Earthquake

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    Fungi, Wet Rot, Dry Rot and "Virus": One of These Things is Not Like the Other

    Five-Year Statute of Limitations on Performance-Type Surety Bonds

    The Buck Stops Over There: Have Indemnitors Become the Insurers of First and Last Resort?

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    Town Concerned Over Sinkhole at Condo Complex

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    Court Denies Insurers' Motions for Summary Judgment Under All Risk Policies

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Haight’s John Arbucci and Kristian Moriarty Selected for Super Lawyers’ 2020 Southern California Rising Stars

    Insured Under Property Insurance Policy Should Comply With Post-Loss Policy Conditions
    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

    Ohio Does Not Permit Retroactive Application of Statute of Repose

    October 08, 2014 —
    Don Gregory of Kegler Brown Hill + Ritter (published in Association of Corporate Counsel) reported that while Ohio currently has a statute of repose, the Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled in a case where the development was built in 1990 but the defects weren’t discovered until 2003 that the statute of repose did not apply since “Ohio had no enforceable statute of repose in 2003 (it had been declared unconstitutional).” Gregory stated that “[t]his case means that some construction defect claims, by condo associations or others, may survive even though construction was completed more than a decade ago.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    June 21, 2017 —
    This past week was President Trump’s “Infrastructure Week.” A week dedicated, according to the White House’s official blog, “to addressing America’s crumbling infrastructure” and to try to build support for the President’s campaign promise to invest “at least” $1 trillion on improving the nation’s infrastructure. For the construction industry it was going to be an exciting week. Not only because it could mean new opportunities for the industry but from a policy perspective our nation’s infrastructure, which recently received a grade of D+ from the American Society of Engineers, is in dire need of investment. But Infrastructure Week ended up being more like Infrastructure Weak. No infrastructure bills were signed or introduced, no executive orders were issued, and no new departments or commissions were created, although at the end of the week President Trump promised to form a “council” and “office” to review the environmental permitting process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    KB to Spend $43.2 Million on Florida Construction Defects

    August 27, 2013 —
    In their second quarter filing with the SEC, KB Homes estimates that repairing damage caused by defects in framing, stucco, roofs, and sealant will cost it $43.2 million. That estimate includes homes that are yet to be identified. KB had estimated lower costs earlier, but subsequently determined it was necessary to increase the funds by $15.9. As a result, the firm showed a loss in the second quarter. The company hopes to recover some funds in insurance settlements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Air in There: Offices, and Issues, That Seem to Make Us Stupid

    October 28, 2015 —
    It's tempting to conclude from the climate change debate that all that carbon dioxide in the air is making everybody dumber. In fact, all that carbon dioxide in the air is making everybody dumber. Workers showed diminished cognitive functioning after spending several hours in office air that had normal levels of CO2 and chemical pollutants and ordinary ventilation, in a study published this week in Environmental Health Perspectives. Researchers tinkered with the levels of carbon dioxide and volatile organic compounds (airborne chemicals) and the amount of outside air pumped in, while the subjects did their regular work, though at a Syracuse University lab. The levels were chosen to simulate the indoor environment of conventional offices, LEED Platinum "green" buildings, and green buildings with an elevated outdoor ventilation rate ("Green+"). The 24 participants, including architects, engineers, and marketing professionals, were exposed to different conditions on different days during the six-day study, not knowing of the changes. At 3 pm every day, the researchers administered computer-based cognitive tests of strategy-setting and focus, for example, and recorded the results and the kind of air the participants had been breathing. A day spent in the air of an extra-ventilated green building correlated with the best performance on the tests. Participants performed 61 percent better in green-building air than in conventional air, and 101 percent higher in the Green+ scenario. The research was supported in part by a United Technologies gift to Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. United Technologies, which makes building systems, wasn't involved in the experiment itself. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eric Roston, Bloomberg

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    September 23, 2024 —
    On July 26, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued its Fair Choice – Employee Voice Final Rule (“Final Rule”), which takes effect September 30, 2024. The Final Rule eases the process for unions in the construction industry to convert their status as collective bargaining representative of bargaining unit employees from Section 8(f) to 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”) simply by placing certain recognitional acceptance language in their collective bargaining agreements. As a result, construction industry employers should review their collective bargaining agreements prior to signing to determine if such language exists. Section 9(a) Non-Construction Industry Employers In most industries, not including construction, union recognitional status as collective bargaining representative of the employer’s employees is governed by Section 9(a) of the Act. In order for a Union to obtain recognitional status under Section 9(a), the union must either: (1) file a petition with the NLRB showing support of 30% of the proposed bargaining unit via employee executed authorization cards and win an election of 51% of the employees in the proposed bargaining unit who actually vote; or (2) by reaching an agreement with the employer that the union possesses employee executed authorization cards from 51% of the proposed bargaining unit, which has been confirmed by a neutral arbitrator pursuant to a card count. Once such status is achieved, the union and employer are required to meet and bargain towards reaching a collective bargaining agreement covering the terms and conditions of employment of the union represented employees. A Section 9(a) union cannot have its recognitional status revoked absent the loss of majority support of the employees it represents. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com

    Issues to Watch Out for When Managing Remote Workers

    July 13, 2020 —
    Managing remote workers comes with its share of challenges. The complexities of setting and articulating expectations in a remote work environment – and providing feedback about performance tied to those expectations - adds an additional burden to our already-crowded work lives, particularly for managers who are new to remote supervisory roles. This article highlights some key issues that arise when managing remote workers. Issue 1: Insufficient feedback Annual reviews are not enough. Data clearly reflects that employees who receive regular feedback are happier, and more productive, in their roles. Employees require a “continuous feedback loop” to grow and improve. While many companies started migrating toward continuous feedback before the pandemic, remote work further increases the need for more frequent (formal and informal) check-ins. Organizations must provide management with a toolkit for providing – and receiving – constant feedback, and this toolkit should take into account changes in work styles and modalities of communication when employees are remote. Given the ease with which we can give face-to-face feedback compared to “virtual” feedback, this toolkit becomes even more important when only some employees are remote and others have returned onsite. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa (Powar) Clarke, Payne & Fears
    Ms. Clarke may be contacted at mec@paynefears.com

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    January 06, 2012 —

    November 2011 marked the first anniversary of the Construction Defect Journal. During the first year our staff and contributors in the insurance and legal communities have compiled several hundred articles of interest to the construction defect and claims community.

    Each of these articles are maintained in the CDJ archives, and are accessible at http://www.constructiondefectjournal.com/archives.html. Each story in the archives is listed in the order it was posted to the archives. Each story in the archives opens up in its own page, so you can easily locate topics and articles of interest.

    If you’re new to Construction Defect Journal, or just want peruse past articles, please take a moment to visit the CDJ Archives page. Also please feel encouraged to submit your firm’s articles or legal publications of interest to the CD community at http://www.constructiondefectjournal.com/submitStory.html.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    February 06, 2023 —
    In the beautiful coastline region along the famous Pacific Coast Highway between Ventura and Santa Barbara rests the small cottage town of La Conchita. With unobstructed ocean views, this community is only 820 feet wide on a narrow strip of land abutting a 590 feet high cliffside bluff. The bluff has a slope of approximately 35 degrees and consists of poorly cemented marine sediments. This is the perfect recipe for constant disaster from a geological perspective and the site of several major landslides that have devastated this community. Geologic evidence indicates that landslides, which are part of the larger Rincon Mountain slides, have been occurring at and near La Conchita for many thousands of years up to the present with reported landslides beginning as early as 1865. In both 1889 and 1909, the Southern Pacific Rail Line running along the coast was inundated. In the 1909 slide, a train was buried. Since that time, other slides have occurred, covering at times cultivated land, roadways, and the community itself. The two most devastating landslides occurred in 1995 and 2005. 1995 Landslide From October 1994-March 1995, there was double the amount of seasonal rainfall for the area – in excess of 30 inches. The slide occurred on March 3, 1995, when surface cracks in the upper part of the slope opened on the hillside, and surface runoff was infiltrating into the subsurface. The heavy rains essentially saturated the slope causing a massive slide. On March 4, 1995, the hill behind La Conchita failed, moving tens of meters in minutes, and buried nine homes with no loss of life. The County of Ventura immediately declared the whole community a Geological Hazard Area, imposing building restrictions on the community to restrict new construction. On March 10, 1995, a subsequent debris flow from a canyon to the northwest damaged five additional houses in the northwestern part of La Conchita. In total, the slide measured approximately 390 feet wide, 1080 feet long and 98 feet deep. The deposit covered approximately 9.9 acres, and the volume was estimated to be approximately 1.7 million cubic yards of sediment. The devastation was immeasurable and the damage to homes, property and infrastructure was in the millions of dollars to repair. Litigation quickly arose following the 1995 slide with seventy-one homeowners suing the La Conchita Ranch Co. in Bateman v. La Conchita Ranch Co. The judge ruled that irrigation was not the major cause of the slide and that the ranch owners were not responsible. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Daniel Feld, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com