BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction project management 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


    New York Instructs Property Carriers to Advise Insureds on Business Interruption Coverage

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    The Drought Is Sinking California

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    US Secretary of Labor Withdraws Guidance Regarding Independent Contractors

    California Booms With FivePoint New Schools: Real Estate

    Gilbane Project Exec Completes His Mission Against the Odds

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    When Do You Call Your Lawyer?

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Lewis Brisbois Successfully Concludes Privacy Dispute for Comedian Kathy Griffin Following Calif. Supreme Court Denial of Review

    Contractor to Repair Defective Stucco, Plans on Suing Subcontractor

    Cold Stress Safety and Protection

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    Safety, Technology Combine to Change the Construction Conversation

    New Jersey Supreme Court Issue Important Decision for Homeowners and Contractors

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

    Stay-At-Home Orders and Work Restrictions with 50 State Matrix

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    California Joins the Majority of States in Modifying Its Survival Action Statute To Now Permit Recovery for Pain, Suffering And Disfigurement

    St. Petersburg Florida’s Tallest Condo Tower Allegedly Riddled with Construction Defects

    Insurer Not Responsible for Insured's Assignment of Policy Benefits

    Water Bond Would Authorize $7.5 Billion for California Water Supply Infrastructure Projects

    Angela Cooner Receives Prestigious ASA State Advocate Award

    Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Yields Dueling Suits on Tower

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Sixth Circuit Lifts Stay on OSHA’s COVID-19 Temporary Emergency Standards. Supreme Court to Review

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    Measure of Damages in Negligent Procurement of Surety Bonds / Insurance

    New York's New Gateway: The Overhaul of John F. Kennedy International Airport

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Is Construction in Arizona Back to Normal?

    Are Contracting Parties Treated the Same When it Comes to Notice Obligations?

    Surveys: Hundreds of Design Professionals See Big COVID-19 Business Impacts

    The Little Ice Age and Delay Claims

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    Women Make Their Mark on Construction Leadership

    A Brief Primer on Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien When the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    Industry Groups Decry Jan. 6 Riot; DOT Chief Chao Steps Down in Protest

    Contractor Gets Benched After Failing to Pay Jury Fees

    HOA Coalition Statement on Construction-Defects Transparency Legislation

    ACS Obtains Overwhelming Jury Trial Victory for General Contractor Client

    English v. RKK. . . The Rest of the Story
    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

    Type I Differing Site Conditions Claim is Not Easy to Prove

    May 30, 2018 —
    A differing site condition claim will almost universally result in both a cost and time impact. There will be additional, unanticipated costs incurred. And there will likely be a delay requiring additional time to perform. A Type I differing site condition claim is when the contractor encounters conditions at the site different than those indicated in the contract documents. That seems easy enough to prove, right. Nope. And, I mean nope! If you don’t believe me, consider the recent decision in Meridian Engineering Co. v. U.S., 885 F.3d 1351 (Fed.Cir. 2018). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    April 11, 2018 —
    Last year, I wrote a post calling attention to stalled efforts in the Colorado legislature to pass meaningful construction defect reform. Shortly thereafter, the legislature got it done in the form of House Bill 17-1279. This bill creates an important pre-litigation notice-and-approval process whenever an HOA initiates a construction defect action in its own name or on behalf of two or more of its members. Before May 2017, the pre-litigation requirements that an HOA had to fulfill before bringing a construction defect claim under the Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform Act (“CDARA”) were generally minor. For example, while many declarations required majority approval from the community prior to initiation of claims, in practice, what the industry was seeing is that some HOAs were making it so that only a majority of the HOA Board had to approve bringing the claim, rather than the majority of interested unit owners. It was also common that, even where the majority of owners were involved, they were often voting in favor of filing a lawsuit or arbitration without fully understanding the risks and costs. This practice presented a risk to developers—it is easier to get approval from a small group than from a larger group, and it is easier to get approval when the voting owners do not fully appreciate the risks and costs inherent in filing a claim. Colorado House Bill 17-1279, which was signed into law by Governor Hickenlooper in May 2017 and is codified at C.R.S. § 38-33.3-303.5, lessens these risks by amending the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”) to add certain pre-litigation requirements. Section 38-33.3-303.5 applies any time an HOA institutes a construction defect action its own name on behalf of itself or two or more unit owners on matters affecting the common interest community. C.R.S. §§ 38-33.3-302(1)(d), -303.5(1)(a). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Luke Mecklenburg, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Mecklenburg may be contacted at lmecklenburg@swlaw.com

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    September 20, 2021 —
    Construction Mediation WorksAs I left a mediation last week at 8:30 at night, I realized something that I knew all along. Mediation works. Why does mediation work? For several reasons that I can think of. The first, and likely most important is that lawyers are expensive. In most construction cases, we charge by the hour and those hours build up, especially close to a trial date. A mediated settlement can avoid this sharp uptick in attorney fees that always occurs in the last month before trial. Therefore the earlier the better. The second is the flexibility to make a business decision. Commercial contractors and subcontractors are in a business, and they should be making business decisions. While one such decision can be to go to litigation; litigation is not always the best solution from a financial, or stress perspective. Construction professionals, with the assistance of construction attorneys, can come up with a creative way to deal with a problem and solve it. 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

    Construction Firm Sues Town over Claims of Building Code Violations

    November 06, 2013 —
    Paradigm Development and Construction LLC has sued Bristol Township, Pennsylvania over the allegation that town building officials colluded with their clients to issue building code violations after Paradigm prepared to sue the clients. John and Patricia Conard hired Paradigm to construct an addition to their home. During the process, the work went through nine inspections before Paradigm stopped work over a payment dispute. Some months later, Bristol Township issued a notice that Paradigm had 37 violations of the building code. Paradigm alleges that the source was a set of photographs provided by the Conards to the building officials. The lawsuit states that Paradigm “was not notified of any construction deficiencies at the Conard property, and was not provided with an opportunity to discuss, defend or refute the allegations of the Municipal Defendants that Plaintiff has violated the Bristol Building code.” The violation notice was withdrawn a few months later. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Little Changed in January

    January 28, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- Confidence among U.S. homebuilders hovered in January close to a nine-year high, indicating the residential real estate market is poised to expand this year. While the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo builder sentiment gauge fell to 57 this month from 58 in December, readings greater than 50 mean more respondents report good market conditions, according to figures issued from the Washington-based group Tuesday. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey called for 58. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg News

    4 Ways to Mitigate Construction Disputes

    March 20, 2023 —
    Resolving construction disputes in litigation (court or arbitration) can be expensive and may drag on for years. Most disputes could have been avoided, or at least mitigated, had the parties (both owners and contractors) identified contract risks during negotiations and been more proactive in communicating the risks during execution of the work. This article highlights four practical risk management approaches that help all parties focus on their mutual interest in close coordination and clear communication at the beginning of the project as well as throughout performance:
    • Identifying and allocating risks;
    • Accurate scheduling;
    • Clear project documentation and communication; and
    • Real-time dispute resolution.
    The intent of these techniques is not to shift legal obligations or risks. Rather, the intent is to keep project personnel and project management for all the participants focused on communicating and working together, including responsibly confronting real problems to avoid or mitigate their impact. Allocating risks, scheduling, project documentation and communication, and real-time dispute resolution are independently relevant on a bilateral basis between the owner, designer, and the various contractors. These approaches and their diligent execution by the parties during construction contribute far more to a successful project than anything lawyers and claims consultants can contribute in after-the-fact legal proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Shaughnessy, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Shaughnessy may be contacted at bshaughnessy@joneswalker.com

    OSHA Finalizes PPE Fitting Requirement for Construction Workers

    December 31, 2024 —
    On December 11, 2024, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it finalized a revision to the personal protective equipment (PPE) standard for the construction industry. The final rule adds specific language to the existing standard requiring employers to provide properly fitting PPE for construction industry workers. This change aligns the construction industry with the standards in place for the general industry. According to OSHA, many types of PPE must properly fit workers. Improperly sized PPE can ineffectively protect workers, creating new hazards for them, such as oversized gloves or protective clothing being caught in machinery and discouraging use because of discomfort or poor fit. OSHA stated that the longstanding issue with improperly fitting PPE particularly impacted women, as well as physically smaller or larger workers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan H. Schaefer, Robinson+Cole
    Mr. Schaefer may be contacted at jschaefer@rc.com

    Illinois Town’s Bond Sale Halted Over Fraudulent Hotel Deals

    June 26, 2014 —
    A city outside Chicago was blocked from selling bonds after the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission accused it of defrauding investors and steering secret fees to a municipal official. The case against Harvey, Illinois, a struggling city of 25,000 battered by poverty and crime, involves about $14 million in bonds sold from 2008 to 2010 that were to pay for development of a Holiday Inn hotel and conference venue. The SEC said that the city hoodwinked investors by using $1.7 million to pay payroll and other operating expenses, while the hotel stands in disrepair with holes in its facade, exposed studs and a gutted interior. The SEC said Comptroller Joseph Letke, 55, also profited by receiving $269,000 in undisclosed payments while advising the developer of the ill-fated project. Mr. Selway may be contacted at wselway@bloomberg.net; Ms. Campbell may be contacted at ecampbell14@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Selway and Elizabeth Campbell, Bloomberg