BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    Whose Employee is it Anyway?: Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Injured Subcontractor's Claim Based on Modified Employer's Liability Exclusion

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    WSHB Expands into the Southeast

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    Chinese Brooklyn-to-Los Angeles Plans Surge: Real Estate

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Collapse Coverage Fails

    Intentionally Set Atlanta Interstate Fire Closes Artery Until June

    AI AEC Show: Augmenta Gives Designers Superpowers

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold

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

    Bank of America’s Countrywide Ordered to Pay $1.3 Billion

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

    Signed, Sealed and (Almost) Delivered: EU Council Authorizes Signing of U.S. – EU Bilateral Insurance Agreement

    Housing to Top Capital Spending in Next U.S. Growth Leg: Economy

    Traub Lieberman Partner Adam Joffe Named to 2022 Emerging Lawyers List

    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    Updates to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    Las Vegas, Back From the Bust, Revives Dead Projects

    Gardeners in the City of the Future: An Interview with Eric Baczuk

    As Laura Wreaks Havoc Along The Gulf, Is Your Insurance Ready to Respond?

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    No Bad Faith in Insurer's Denial of Collapse Claim

    Mexico's Richest Man Carlos Slim to Rebuild Collapsed Subway Line

    Performance Bond Surety Takeover – Using Terminated Contractor To Complete The Work

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    Re-Entering the Workplace: California's Guideline for Employers

    Auditor: Prematurely Awarded Contracts Increased Honolulu Rail Cost by $354M

    El Paso Increases Surety Bond Requirement on Contractors

    Recent Developments with California’s Right to Repair Act

    Insurer Must Cover Portions of Arbitration Award

    Builders FirstSource to Buy ProBuild for $1.63 Billion

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Property Damage to Insured's Own Work is Not Covered

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Floors Collapse at Russian University in St. Petersburg

    Homeowner Has No Grounds to Avoid Mechanics Lien

    Patrick Haggerty Promoted to Counsel

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Ensuing Loss Provision Salvages Coverage for Water Damage Claim

    The Role of Code Officials in the Design-Build Process

    A Bill for an Act Concerning Workers’ Compensation – 2014 Edition

    Understanding the Details: Suing Architects and Engineers Can Get Technical

    Coverage Under Builder's Risk Policy Properly Excluded for Damage to Existing Structure Only

    Virginia Tech Has Its Own Construction Boom

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    Although Property Damage Arises From An Occurrence, Coverage Barred By Business Risk Exclusions
    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

    Project Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Recording Deadline

    April 08, 2024 —
    The California mechanics lien is one of the most powerful collection remedies available to contractors, subcontractors and suppliers who are unpaid for work performed and materials supplied in relation to a California private works construction project. The mechanics lien allows the claimant to actually sell the property where the work was carried out in order to obtain payment, entirely of course, against the wishes of the property owner. There are a number of important steps to follow and timelines to be met in order to pursue this remedy. First, Understand Your Preliminary Notice Deadline Working within deadlines is absolutely crucial to preserving mechanics lien rights under California law. The deadlines differ, depending on whether you are a “direct” contractor, also known as “original” or “prime” contractor (one who contracts directly with the property owner) or a subcontractor or material supplier. The process begins with the serving of a “preliminary notice” no later than 20 days after the party serving the preliminary notice begins supplying labor or materials to the project. Direct contractors are only required to serve the preliminary notice on the construction lender (Civil Code section 8200-8216), whereas subcontractors and material suppliers must serve not only the construction lender, but also the owner and direct contractor (see Civil Code section 8200(e)). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    New Safety Standards Issued by ASSE and ANSI

    March 28, 2012 —

    The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) have recently announced their approval of two new safety standards to enhance construction site safety.

    The two new standards, which are set to take effect during June 2012, are the ANSI/ASSE A10.1-2011 Pre-Project and Pre-Task Safety and Health Planning for Construction and Demolition Operations, and the ANSI/ASSE A10.26-2011 Emergency Procedures for Construction and Demolition Sites.

    The new A10.1-2011 standard was designed to assist construction owners, contractors, and designers by ensuring that safety and health planning were standard parts of their pre-construction planning. It is also intended to help owners of construction sites to establish a process for evaluating constructor candidates with regard to their safety and health performance planning.

    The A10.26 standard applies to emergency situations, including fires, collapses, and hazardous spills. The standard deals with emergency rescue, evacuation, and transportation of injured workers, and also plans for coordinating with emergency medical facilities ahead of potential disasters.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback of Ragsdale Liggett PLLC. Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com.

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

    Sacramento Water Works Recognized as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark

    October 03, 2022 —
    RESTON, Va. – The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Sacramento Section today recognized the City of Sacramento Water Works a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. The landmark, which was completed in 1854, was recognized at a dedication ceremony at the Sacramento History Museum led by ASCE's Sacramento Section, which is celebrating its centennial anniversary of the Section's founding. The section was joined by Ken Rosenfield, director, ASCE Region 9 and Chuck Spinks, chair, Region 9 History and Heritage Committee. ASCE represents more than 150,000 members of the civil engineering profession worldwide. It is the oldest national engineering society in the United States. ASCE recognizes historically significant civil engineering projects, structures, and sites all over the world. More than 280 projects have earned the prestigious title for creativity and innovation, and almost all are executed under challenging conditions. The City of Sacramento Water Works was the first municipal, city-owned water system west of the Mississippi River. This project was inspired by a disastrous fire in 1852 that destroyed 27 blocks in Sacramento and the city did not have a water system capable of putting out fires. The water works site was equipped with a distribution system with hydrants that could fight fires. The City of Sacramento Water Works was nominated by the ASCE Sacramento Section Centennial Committee. For more information about ASCE's Historic Civil Engineering Landmark Program, go to https://www.asce.org/about-civil-engineering/history-and-heritage/historic-landmarks. ABOUT THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Founded in 1852, the American Society of Civil Engineers represents more than 150,000 civil engineers worldwide and is America's oldest national engineering society. ASCE works to raise awareness of the need to maintain and modernize the nation's infrastructure using sustainable and resilient practices, advocates for increasing and optimizing investment in infrastructure, and improve engineering knowledge and competency. For more information, visit www.asce.org or www.infrastructurereportcard.org and follow us on Twitter, @ASCETweets and @ASCEGovRel. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Employee or Independent Contractor? New Administrator’s Interpretation Issued by Department of Labor Provides Guidance

    August 04, 2015 —
    The question of whether a worker should be classified as an independent contractor or an employee is fraught with confusion and misunderstanding for many businesses. Compounding the problem is the fact that there are a number of different tests used to determine employee status, which vary by jurisdiction and by the particular law in question. For example, the Internal Revenue Service uses the common law rules which focus on the degree of control and independence exercised by the worker. In contrast, the United States Department of Labor uses the “economic realities” test which focuses on whether the worker is economically dependent on the employer. In an effort to help combat the confusion over proper worker classification, the United States Department of Labor (DOL) has issued a new Administrator’s Interpretation that provides a detailed explanation of the test used by the DOL to determine if a worker has been misclassified as an independent contractor. The DOL enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which mandates that employees (but not independent contractors) be paid minimum wage and overtime. When a business misclassifies non-exempt workers as independent contractors, and those workers are not paid the minimum hourly wage for their labor, or are not paid overtime when they work more than 40 hours in a workweek, this violates the FLSA. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tanya Salgado, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Salgado may be contacted at salgadot@whiteandwilliams.com

    COVID-19 Likely No Longer Covered Under Force Majeure

    February 01, 2023 —
    A recent decision by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has shaken up construction contracts. While companies could claim “force majeure” to exempt themselves from contractual obligations during much of the pandemic, this decision challenges ongoing validity of those claims. The decision was based on the Army Corps of Engineers deeming a bid from Boulder, Colorado–based American Mine Services (AMS) as nonresponsive because it included a COVID-19 force majeure clause. In reviewing the Corps’ decision, GAO—referencing the Federal Acquisition Regulation—found that “epidemics” and “quarantine restrictions” were already included in the contract between the Corps and AMS. Although AMS claimed that “COVID-19 is considered a force majeure event along with any other similar disease, epidemic or pandemic event,” the GAO concluded that this interpretation limited the rights of the government too much. Reprinted courtesy of Rachel E. Pelovitz, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Pelovitz may be contacted at pelovitz@abc.org

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

    July 02, 2018 —
    On May 24, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims decided one of what may be many cases involving the terrible flooding wrought by Hurricane Harvey in the Houston, TX region. The Court of Federal Claims has divided thousands of pending claims into “upstream” and “downstream” categories, depending on whether the flooded properties were located upstream or downstream of two U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) flood control reservoirs that were constructed in the 1940s and 1950s. The case is In re Upstream Addicks and Barker (Texas) Flood-Control Reservoirs; however, the Court of Federal Claims’ order in this case applies to “all upstream cases.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    The Uncertain Future of the IECC

    January 11, 2021 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday, I welcome an old friend and past Guest Post Friday contributor, Mike Collignon. Mike is the Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Green Builder® Coalition. He engages in national and state-level advocacy and publishes regular content for Green Builder® Media. Mike is also the Chair of the WERS Development Group and has served as the moderator or host for Green Builder® Media’s Impact Series webinars from 2012–present. The following is an op-ed based on the author’s attendance at public meetings and conversations with inside sources. “I think that you will all agree that we are living in most interesting times.” – Joseph Chamberlain, 1898 2020 was a historic year, both for reasons we currently comprehend and for reasons we may only understand in retrospect. Depending on how an upcoming ICC Board decision goes, it may prove to be the year the IECC met its demise. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Oregon Duty to Defend Triggered by Potential Timing of Damage

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Oregon Supreme Court has concluded that if it is possible that damage could have occurred prior to the completion of the project, then the policies in effect at that time are triggered. John Green of Farella Braun + Martel LLP writes that “we have long argued that, since the duty to defend exists if there is any ‘potential’ of covered liability, there is a potential that damage happened before that project was completed, or at any time after completion, triggering all policies in that time frame.” The Oregon court concluded that if property damage could have happened during construction, the insuerer had a duty to defend and “the insured had no burden to establish any additional facts to support that potential.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of