BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineer
    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


    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Holds that Nearly All Project Labor Agreements are Illegal

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2021

    No Coverage for Hurricane Sandy Damage

    Erector Tops Out 850-Foot-Tall Rainier Square Tower in Only 10 Months

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Seller Faces Federal Charges for Lying on Real Estate Disclosure Forms

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    Bond Principal Necessary on a Mechanic’s Lien Claim

    Mortgage Firms Face Foreclosure Ban Until 2022 Under CFPB Plan

    Newmeyer & Dillion Selected to 2017 OCBJ’s Best Places to Work List

    Replevin Actions: What You Should Know

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    Narrow Promissory Estoppel Exception to Create Insurance Coverage

    Philadelphia Proposed Best Value Procurement Bill

    Contractor Sues Golden Gate Bridge District Over Suicide Net Project

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

    PAGA Right of Action Not Applicable to Construction Workers Under Collective Bargaining Agreement

    The Business of Engineering: An Interview with Matthew Loos

    Canada Housing Surprises Again With July Starts Increase

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Apprentices on Public Works Projects: Sometimes it’s Not What You Do But Who You Do the Work For That Counts

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    CA Senate Report States Caltrans ‘Gagged and Banished’ its Critics

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    Teaming Agreements- A Contract to Pursue a Solicitation and Negotiate

    Litigation Privilege Saves the Day for Mechanic’s Liens

    Netherlands’ Developer Presents Modular Homes for Young Professionals

    Granting Stay, Federal Court Reviews Construction Defect Coverage in Hawaii

    Hilary Soaks California With Flooding Rain and Snarls Flights

    A Court-Side Seat: Waters, Walls and Pipelines

    OSHA Issues Guidance on Mitigating, Preventing Spread of COVID-19 in the Workplace

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Precast Standards' Work Under Way as Brittle Fracture Warnings Aired

    Liability policy covers negligent construction: GA high court

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    Quick Note: Discretion in Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    A Primer on Insurance for Construction Projects

    Poor Pleading Leads to Loss of Claim for Trespass Due to Relation-Back Doctrine, Statute of Limitations

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Re-affirms American Girl To Find Coverage for Damage Caused by Subcontractors

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part I

    Unlocking the Potential of AI and Chat GBT in Construction Management

    Experts Weigh In on Bilingual Best Practices for Jobsites

    Work without Permits may lead to Problems Later

    Burlingame Construction Defect Case Heading to Trial
    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

    When is an Indemnification Provision Unenforceable?

    September 06, 2021 —
    Virginia Code Sec. 11-4.1 makes indemnification provisions in construction contracts that are so broad as to indemnify the indemnitee from its own negligence unenforceable. Of course, this begs the question as to what language of indemnification provisions make them unenforceable. A case from the City of Chesapeake Virginia Circuit Court examined this question. In Wasa Props., LLC v. Chesapeake Bay Contrs., Inc., 103 Va. Cir 423 [unfortunately I can’t find a copy to which to link], Wasa Properties (“Wasa”) hired Chesapeake Bay Contractors (“CBC”) to perform utility work at Lake Thrasher in the Tidewater area of Virginia. Wasa then alleged that CBC breached the contract and caused over $400,000 in damages due to incorrectly installed water lines. Wasa used the following indemnification language as the basis for its suit:
    To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner and his agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including but not limited to attorney’s fees arising out of or resulting from the performance of the Work.
    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

    Delaware District Court Finds CGL Insurer Owes Condo Builder a Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claims — Based on the Subcontractor Exception to the Your Work Exclusion

    October 04, 2021 —
    On September 7, 2021, in one of the few decisions addressing the scope of coverage for faulty workmanship under Delaware law, the Delaware District Court denied an insurer’s motion seeking a declaration that it neither needed to defend nor indemnify an insured-builder under a commercial general liability policy. In this declaratory judgment action, Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company v. Zonko Builders, the insurer argued that the ongoing underlying action failed to properly plead an “occurrence” in a case alleging damages to a condominium caused by faulty workmanship involving subcontractors.* Zonko Builders (Zonko) served as the general contractor, supervising subcontractors. The Condominium Association sued Zonko for damages allegedly resulting from design and construction deficiencies. The motion was opposed by the Condominium Association, which cross-moved for partial judgment on the pleadings. In AE-Newark Associates, L.P. v. CNA Insurance Companies, 2001 Del. Super. LEXIS 370 (Del. Super. Ct. Oct. 2, 2001), the Delaware Superior Court found that an insured was entitled to coverage for damages arising from a faulty roof system installed by a subcontractor on behalf of the insured general contractor. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams and Laura Rossi, White and Williams Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Rossi may be contacted at rossil@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Leads to Death of Worker

    January 28, 2013 —
    The family of a Florida man has received $2.4 million in damages as a result of his death. Victor Lizarraga was killed when a steel column fell due to the anchor bolts being improperly secured. The general contractor on the project, R. L. Haines, told subcontractors that the epoxy had sufficient time to cure. An OSHA investigation determined that the epoxy was not used properly. Mr. Lizarraga worked for a subcontractor on the project. Mr. Lizarraga and his coworkers were hired to erect steel columns. The epoxy failed, sending a 1,750-pound column down onto Mr. Lizarraga. According to the lawsuit, "due to the sudden and unexpected nature of this incident Mr. Lizarraga had no ability, opportunity or time to get out of the way of the falling column." Other parties in the lawsuit settled with the family. R. L. Haines was the only defendant to go to a jury trial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. Homebuilder Confidence Rises Most in Almost a Year

    June 18, 2014 —
    Confidence among U.S. homebuilders rose in June by the most in almost a year, a sign the residential real estate market is stabilizing after reeling from severe winter weather earlier this year. The National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo sentiment gauge climbed to 49 this month from 45 in May, the biggest gain since July 2013, figures from the Washington-based group showed today. Readings greater than 50 mean more respondents report good market conditions. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey called for 47. Current sales, the outlook for future purchases and prospective buyer traffic all improved this month, today’s figures showed, indicating mortgage rates close to historically low levels and a strengthening job market are sustaining demand. Improving sentiment comes as the world’s largest economy picks up this quarter following a contraction in the first three months of 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shobhana Chandra – Bloomberg
    Ms. Chandra may be contacted at schandra1@bloomberg.net

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    April 13, 2017 —
    Although we live in a politically-divided nation, there is one issue on which there seems widespread agreement: our country requires a massive upgrade to its infrastructure. Rundown airports, crumbling highways, obsolete ports, and dangerous bridges are now endemic across the United States. By contrast, Asian airports and elegant European bridges and rails show that our country needs an upgrade, the cost of which will be enormous. President Trump promised to revitalize America’s aging roads, bridges, railways, and airports. He chose Wilbur Ross for Commerce Secretary and professor of Conservative Economics and Public Policy, Peter Navarro, to formulate an infrastructure plan. Navarro and Ross recommended that the government allocate $137 billion in tax credits for private investors who underwrite infrastructure projects. They estimate that over the next ten years, the credits could spur $1 trillion in investments. That is how much President Trump promised to spend on infrastructure, a key part of his job-creation plan. His plan involves building the infrastructure with private-money financing. Public Private Partnerships (“PPP”) are not a new concept and have been successful in Canada, Europe, and various U.S. states who have pioneered this method of procurement. Federal tax credits have been used to spur private investment in housing, resulting in tens of thousands of low-income housing developments over the years. The credits are sold to private entities such as banks and equity firms that invest anywhere from $.70 to $1.10 in housing developments for every dollar they receive in credits, a ratio that fluctuates with economic conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    September 16, 2024 —
    Untimely payment by the owner for contract work and additional work on construction projects can place an unfair financial burden on contractors and subcontractors. Most states have attempted to eliminate or mitigate this inequity in construction contracting through Prompt Payment Acts that govern payment deadlines and provide remedies for untimely payment. This article addresses the legislative trends aimed at minimizing the risk of non-payment, overdue payment, and withholding retainage in favor of downstream parties to a construction contract. Fortifying Contractor Protections with “Bright-Line” Language Over the last decade, states have been tightening prompt payment laws by replacing broad, general statutory language with bright-line rules. What is a bright-line rule? A specific or definite figure, a quantifiable marker—i.e., something owners, contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers should be aware of. Practically speaking, the more bright-line a prompt payment statute is, the greater the likelihood it will affect a construction project in your state. A standard form construction contract, if not reviewed carefully, can create conflicts or confusion if it gives a party more leeway on payment deadlines than the applicable Prompt Payment Act. For example, consider an owner-issued Construction Change Directive (“CCD”) that requires a contractor to commence additional work immediately while a formal change order is negotiated. Consequently, a CCD can push financial burdens downstream, whether inadvertently or not, and may conflict with statutory payment deadlines. Nevertheless, an owner can be justified in its utilization of a CCD to maintain the project schedule. How should the parties competing interests be resolved? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peckar & Abramson, P.C.

    Colorado House Bill 1279 Stalls over 120-day Unit Owner Election Period

    April 20, 2017 —
    With the session more than halfway through, the Colorado Legislature’s 2017 attempts at meaningful construction defect reform may fail again. This year, the Legislature did not attempt a single-bill construction defect overhaul like those that have failed over the last half-decade. Rather, it has sought to enact reforms on a piecemeal basis, with several smaller bills addressing specific issues that have been affecting condominium construction along Colorado’s booming Front Range. This new approach appears to be headed towards much the same outcome as the failed efforts of the past. House Bill 1169 would have given developers a statutory right to repair before being sued by homeowners, and Senate Bill 156 would mandate arbitration or mediation. Both have been assigned to the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee (often viewed as the “bill-kill committee”), and have little chance of being resuscitated this session. This was also the fate of House Bill 1279, but bipartisan support had many believing that it still had a chance of passing—at least until last week. House Bill 1279 would require an executive board of a homeowners association to satisfy several prerequisites before suing a developer or builder, namely to (1) notify all unit owners and the developer or builder against whom the lawsuit is being considered; (2) call an association meeting where the builder or developer could present relevant facts and arguments; and (3) get approval from the majority of the unit owners after providing detailed disclosures about the lawsuit, including the potential costs and benefits thereof. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    February 11, 2013 —
    Whether construction defect claims against an insured contractor or subcontractor are covered is undergoing an intense debate in Colorado that is reminiscent of the current coverage battle in Hawaii. Although I missed the case until recently, the decision in Colo. Pool Sys. v. Scottsdale Ins Co., 2012 Colo. App. LEXIS 1732 (Colo. Ct. App. Oct. 25, 2012), appears to divert from a prior case from the Colorado Court of Appeals, Gen. Sec. Indem. Co. v. Mountain States Mut. Cas. Co., 205 P.3d 529 (Colo. App. 2009). Gen. Security held that faulty workmanship, standing alone, was not an "accident." Gen. Security was heavily relied upon by the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals when it found construction defects arose from breach of contract and were not covered under a liability policy. See Group Builders v. Admiral Insurance Co., 123 Haw. 142, 231 P.3d 67 (Haw. Ct. App. 2010). In Colo. Pool Sys., Colorado Pool hired subcontractors to construct a poll's concrete shell. After the shell was poured, an inspection noticed that some re-bar was too close to the surface. The owner turned to its general contractor, White Construction Group, and demanded that the pool be removed and replaced. White turned to Colorado Pool, who notified its carrier, Scottsdale. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com