BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design 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


    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    Working Safely With Silica: Health Hazards and OSHA Compliance

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    Home Prices Rose in Fewer U.S. Markets in Fourth Quarter

    Anticipatory Repudiation of a Contract — The Prospective Breach

    Congress Relaxes Several PPP Loan Requirements

    Strangers in a Strange Land: Revisiting Arbitration Provisions to Account for Increasing International Influences

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    Arizona Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Provision Relating to Statutory Authority for Constructing and Operating Sports and Tourism Complexes

    Arbitration and Mediation: What’s the Difference? What to Expect.

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    How Will Artificial Intelligence Impact Construction Litigation?

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    Developers Can Tap into DOE’s $400 Million for Remote and Rural Clean Energy Projects

    Neither Designated Work Exclusion nor Pre-Existing Damage Exclusion Defeat Duty to Defend

    It’s Not What You Were Thinking!

    General Partner Is Not Additional Insured For Construction Defect Claim

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    Damage to Plaintiffs' Home Caused By Unmoored Boats Survives Surface Water Exclusion

    Five Keys to Driving Digital Transformation in Engineering and Construction

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense by U.S. News/Best Lawyers

    Manhattan Condo Lists for Record $150 Million

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

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

    Nevada Senate Bill 435 is Now in Effect

    Kentucky Court Upholds Arbitration Award, Denies Appeal

    How Data Drives the Future of Design

    When Does a Claim Against an Insurance Carrier for Failing to Defend Accrue?

    It’s a COVID-19 Pandemic; It’s Everywhere – New Cal. Bill to Make Insurers Prove Otherwise

    Supreme Court of Wisconsin Applies Pro Rata Allocation Based on Policy Limits to Co-Insurance Dispute

    Termination of Construction Contracts

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking in The U.S. News – Best Lawyers ® as “Best Law Firms”!

    Manhattan Trophy Home Sellers Test Buyer Limits on Price

    The Power of Team Bonding: Transforming Workplaces for the Better

    Court Upholds Denial of Collapse Coverage Where Building Still Stands

    Grad Student Sues UC Santa Cruz over Mold in Residence

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    Acord Certificates of Liability Insurance: What They Don’t Tell You Can Hurt You

    The Trend in the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Defect Litigation

    Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage for Injury To Subcontractor's Employee

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    Gone Fishing: Tenant’s Insurer Casts A Line Seeking To Subrogate Against The Landlord

    Hospital Inspection to Include Check for Construction Defects

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    Lien Law Unlikely To Change — Yet

    $48 Million Award and Successful Defense of $135 Million Claim

    Recommendations and Drafting Considerations for Construction Contingency Clauses Part III
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

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

    March 13, 2023 —
    California has a number of prompt payment penalty statutes on the books. Among them is Civil Code section 8800 which requires project owners on private works projects to pay progress payments to direct contractors within 30 days after demand for payment pursuant to contract or be subject to prompt payment penalties of two percent (2%) per month on the amount wrongfully withheld. Like California’s other prompt payment penalty statutes, however, there is an important carve out: If there is a good faith dispute between the project owner and the direct contractor the project owner may withhold up to 150% of the dispute amount and not be subject to prompt payment penalties. And that, my friends, is a higher-tiered party’s “get out of jail free” card. In a case of first impression, the 1st District Court of Appeals, in Vought Construction Inc. v. Stock (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 622, examined whether a project owner’s claim for liquidated damages constitutes a good faith dispute under Civil Code section 8800. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Trial Court's Award of Contractual Fees to Public Adjuster Overturned

    June 03, 2019 —
    A judgment awarding the public adjuster his compensation for work performed under contract was remanded for further proceedings by the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals. Joslin v Ota Camp-Makibaka Ass'n, 2019 Haw. App. LEXIS 155 (Haw. Ct. App. April 5, 2019). A fire destroyed the homeowners' residence on September 19, 2013. The property was subject to the bylaws of the Association of Apartment Owners of Ota Camp. The Association had a policy with Alterra Excess & Surplus Insurance Company and submitted a claim for all units damaged in the fire. The Association's adjuster came the following day to inspect the site. Separately, Robert Joslin, public adjuster, entered a contract with the homeowners to adjust their claim in exchange for twelve-percent of any insurance proceeds obtained. Over the next several months Joslin pursued insurance proceeds from Alterra on behalf of the homeowners. On December 18, 2013, Joslin filed a complaint with the Insurance Division arguing that Alterra had failed to timely make payments on the claim. On February 10, 2014, Alterra's third party administrator, Engle Martin & Associates, sent a check to Joslin for $231,940 made out to the Association, the homeowners and Joslin. 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

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    July 26, 2017 —
    The court found there was no duty to defend a suit for bodily injury against the additional insured where the injury was not caused by the insured. Consigli Constr. Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95339 (D. Mass. June 21, 2017). Consigli was the general contractor for a renovation project at a high school. Among the subcontractors was American Environmental, Inc., who was responsible for demolishing concrete floors within the existing structures, and Costa Brothers, who did the masonry work. Wellington M. Ely was an employee of Costa Brothers and worked as a mason on the project. Costa Brothers had a CGL policy with Travelers. As a subcontractor, Costa Brothers agreed to name Consigli as an additional insured on its policy. 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

    ABC Chapter President Comments on Miami Condo Collapse

    July 11, 2021 —
    Peter Dyga, ABC Florida East Coast Chapter president, has been one of the go-to experts in the aftermath of the shocking collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside, Florida. As of publication, the death toll stands at 46 people and another 94 remain unaccounted for. On July 7, rescue officials announced the search would transition to a recovery operation at midnight on July 8, following the demolition of the remaining building over the July 4 weekend. Dyga sat down with Construction Executive to discuss the critical nature of this tragedy and to review potential next steps. Construction Executive: This incident has become national news. Why do you think the building collapse has garnered so much attention? Peter Dyga: Because of the enormity of the tragedy and because it’s so uncommon for a building to collapse on its own. Reprinted courtesy of Rachel O'Connell, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    June 17, 2015 —
    Aside from waiver of lien rights (something that will be illegal in Virginia after July 1, 2015), the most troublesome contractual impediment to payment for a subcontractor or supplier on a project often is the “pay if paid” clause. As a general rule, in Virginia, these clauses where drafted in the proper fashion, are enforceable. As I have said many times, in Virginia freedom of contract almost always wins out. While this is the case, I emphasize that such clauses must be very explicit and specific. Furthermore, and in something that should be obvious, these clauses are generally limited by the Courts of Virginia to only be enforceable and to only forgive the need for payment if the upstream contractor on the construction job has not been paid for the work that the sub claiming non payment has done. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Buy Clean California Act Takes Effect on July 1, 2022

    July 25, 2022 —
    The Buy Clean California Act (BCCA) – Public Contract Code section 3500 et seq. – requires state agencies to consider the carbon content of the following products when awarding contracts:
    • Structural steel;
    • Concrete reinforcing steel;
    • Flat glass; and
    • Mineral wool board insulation.
    It is anticipated that additional products may be added through future legislation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    August 20, 2018 —
    In June, the New York Court of Appeals examined the application of a New York Choice of Law provision in a contract – a determinative issue for the case. In Ontario, Inc. v. Samsung C&T Corp., the issue was whether the plaintiff’s claims were subject to Ontario, Canada’s 2-year statute of limitations or New York’s 6-year statute of limitations for breach of contract where the contract contained a broad New York Choice of Law provision. The court found that pursuant to New York’s borrowing statute, Ontario’s more restrictive statute of limitations applied. The action was dismissed as time-barred, serving as a harsh reminder of the potential effects of choice of law and limitations periods. The suit arose out of the following facts. In 2008, an Ontario renewable energy developer, SkyPower Corp. (“SkyPower”), entered into a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with the defendants which allowed the defendants to review SkyPower’s confidential and proprietary information. The review was conditioned on restricted disclosure and the requirement that the information would be destroyed after review. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Grace V. Hebbel, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com

    Charlotte, NC Homebuilder Accused of Bilking Money from Buyers

    April 01, 2015 —
    The Charlotte Observer reported that a homebuilder couple “was arrested Tuesday on charges alleging that they kept more than $600,000 three families paid them to build Lake Wylie homes that were never completed.” Robert Scott Kuhlkin and wife, Sherry Lynn Kuhlkin “accepted $189,000 from one family, $239,000 from another family, and $233,000 from a third family to build houses, 16th Circuit assistant solicitor Matthew Hogge said in court, but instead they ‘took the money for themselves.’” The alleged victims told the court that the homes had defects or were left unfinished. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of