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


    Timely Legal Trends and Developments for Construction

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    COVID-19 Response: Executive Order 13999: Enhancement of COVID-19-Related Workplace Safety Requirements

    Michigan Supreme Court Concludes No Statute of Repose on Breach of Contract

    Don’t Forget to Mediate the Small Stuff

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Enhanced Geothermal Energy Could Be the Next Zero-Carbon Hero

    COVID-19 Impacts on Subcontractor Default Insurance and Ripple Effects

    Fast-Moving Isaias Dishes Out Disruption in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    Administration Seeks To Build New FBI HQ on Current D.C. Site

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Labor Code § 2708 Presumption of Employer Negligence is Not Applicable Against Homeowners Who Hired Unlicensed Painting Company

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    Even Fraud in the Inducement is Tough in Construction

    Contractual “Pay if Paid” and “Pay when Paid” Clauses? What is a California Construction Subcontractor to Do?

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    Overtime! – When the Statute of Limitations Isn’t Game Over For Your Claim

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    Couple Claims Contractor’s Work Is Defective and Incomplete

    Issues of Fact Prevent Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    Is Drone Aerial Photography Really Best for Your Construction Projects?

    Eleventh Circuit Asks Georgia Supreme Court if Construction Defects Are Caused by an "Occurrence"

    Construction Defects through the Years

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    South Caroline Holds Actual Cash Value Can Include Depreciation of Labor Costs

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    Embracing Generative Risk Mitigation in Construction

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    Not So Fast, My Friend: Pacing and Concurrent Delay

    How SmartThings Wants to Automate Your Home

    The Johnstown Dam Failure, as Seen in the Pages of ENR in 1889

    New York Court Rules on Architect's Duty Under Contract and Tort Principles

    Decades of WCC Seminar at the Disneyland Resort

    Action Needed: HB24-1230 Spells Trouble for Colorado Construction Industry and its Insurers

    Miller Wagers Gundlach’s Bearish Housing Position Loses

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    AI – A Designer’s Assistant or a Replacement?

    A Few Green Building Notes

    What You Need to Know About Enforcement Actions by the Contractors State License Board

    From the Ground Up

    Were Quake Standards Illegally Altered for PG&E Nuclear Power Plant?

    The Practical Distinction Between Anticipatory Breach and Repudiation and How to Deal with Both on Construction Projects
    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

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    July 01, 2014 —
    Editors at the San Jose Mercury News called for investigations of the construction of the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge: “It's time for public officials, especially members of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, state legislators and Gov. Jerry Brown, to demand thorough independent analyses.” Problems with the $6.5 billion structure were found about nine months ago, which led to questions regarding the “integrity and maintenance costs” that were allegedly covered up by Caltrans officials. Issues raised included questions “about the strength of thousands of bolts, including at the base of the tower and the connections of the main cable; cracked welds in the suspension span; and rusting of the single cable holding up the bridge.” The Mercury editors, however, do not show much optimism about the situation: “It's likely that, absent a political outcry, Caltrans will sign off. From the start, agency officials have failed to adequately oversee the construction and thrown public money at problems while trying to cover-up their own failures. Brown, ultimately responsible for Caltrans, has dismissed concerns about the bridge's integrity.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Claims Not Covered

    May 10, 2022 —
    The court found that the insured's negligent acts causing damage to only the structure of the home it built were not covered under the CGL policy. Westfield Ins. Co. v. Zaremba Builders II LLC, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36189 (N.D. Ill. March 2, 2022). Zaremba contracted to build a house for the Vrdolyak Trust. After completion of the home, the occupants found many problems, including painting defects such as bubbling and peeling, leaving the basement full of water for months, causing damage to ductwork, framing and piping in the house, etc. The Trust sued and Westfield denied a defense. Westfield filed a declaratory judgment action for a ruling that it had no duty to defend or indemnify. On Westfield's motion for summary judgment, the court determined there was no property damage. Property damage included "physical injury to tangible property." When the alleged damage occurred in the course of a construction project, tangible property had to be property outside the scope of the contract for project. 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

    Subcontractor Entitled to Defense for Defective Work Causing Property Damage Beyond Its Scope of Work

    May 27, 2019 —
    The Illinois Court of Appeals found the subcontractor was owed a defense for alleged property damage caused by its faulty workmanship, but outside its scope of work. Acuity Ins. Co. v. 950 W. Huron Condo. Ass'n, 2019 Ill. App. LEXIS 208 (Ill. Ct. App. March 29, 2019). The condominium association sued its general contractor, Belgravia, for alleged defects allowing water to infiltrate and cause damage. Belgravia filed a third-party complaint against its subcontractors, including the carpentry subcontractor Denk & Roche. Denk & Roche held a CGL policy with two insurers during the relevant period, one with Cincinnati Insurance Company for the period January 1, 2000 through June 1, 2007, and another with Acuity Insurance Company, effective June 1, 2007, through December 31, 2013. Denk & Roche tendered its defense to both insurers. Cincinnati agreed to defend and contributed to a settlement of the AOAO's claims. Acuity denied a defense, contending that the underlying claims did not trigger a duty to defend. Acuity's declaratory judgment suit sought a determination that it had no duty to defend. Cincinnati intervened and argued it was entitled to equitable contribution from Acuity. 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

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    July 09, 2014 —
    Garret Murai, on his California Construction Law Blog, stated that California’s Business and Professions Code Section 7031 has often been described as draconian, harsh, and unjust—but still enforceable. The section does two things: first, it “prohibits unlicensed or improperly licensed contractors from suing to recover compensation for construction work requiring a license,” and second, it “permits property owners to sue such contractors for disgorgement of all compensation paid for such work.” According to Murai, the “strict enforcement of Section 7031” is thought to ensure “that contractors meet the minimum qualifications necessary for licensure.” Murai analyzed the case E. J. Franks Construction, Inc. v Sahota, which “carved out a limited exception to Section 7031 for contractors who form business entities and transfer their existing contractor’s license to such entities.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle

    March 12, 2014 —
    In Manhattan, New York, a “Supreme Court judge partially granted a temporary restraining order to Africa Israel,” which “means the developer does not at this time have to cede control of the Downtown Condominium board to unit owners, following a February lawsuit against the developers by state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman,” according to The Real Deal. The condominium battle began after Schneiderman filed suit against the developers, claiming that they did not fix construction defects, which in turn caused them to fail to obtain a certificate of occupancy, reported The Real Deal. The attorney general “also alleged that the pair misappropriated more than $9 million placed in an escrow account to finance those repairs.” However, according to The Real Deal, Africa Israel has claimed not to be a sponsor of the building. “Attorney Aaron Abraham, representing both Africa Israel and the sponsor of 15 Broad, claimed …that Africa Israel, an Israeli development firm led by billionaire Lev Leviev, never signed any documents claiming to be a sponsor of the building, noting that the sponsor principals were Boymelgreen and Pinchas Cohen.” Steve Sladkus, attorney for the condominium unit owners, told The Real Deal, “They partnered up with Boymelgreen — they need to deal with the fallout of that.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Supreme Court Holds that Constructions Defects May Constitute “Property Damage” Caused By An “Occurrence” Under Standard CGL Policy, Overruling Prior Appellate Court Precedent

    January 08, 2024 —
    On November 30, 2023, the Illinois Supreme Court issued an opinion that overturned precedent in Illinois regarding whether faulty workmanship that only caused damage to the insured’s own work constituted “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” under Illinois law. In Acuity v. M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC, 2023 IL 129087, the Illinois Supreme Court considered whether Acuity, a mutual insurance company, had a duty to defend its additional insured, M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC (M/I Homes), under a subcontractor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policy in connection with an underlying lawsuit brought by a townhome owners’ association for breach of contract and breach of an implied warranty of habitability. The Cook County Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of Acuity finding no duty to defend because the underlying complaint did not allege “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” under the initial grant of coverage of the insurance policy. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that Acuity owed M/I Homes a duty to defend. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed, in part, holding construction defects to the general contractor’s own work may constitute “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” under the standard CGL Policy. This is significant as it overrules prior Illinois precedent finding that repair or replacement of the insured’s defective work does not satisfy the initial grant of coverage of a CGL Policy. By way of background, the underlying litigation stems from alleged construction defects in a residential townhome development in the village of Hanover Park, Illinois. The townhome owners’ association, through its board of directors (the Association) subsequently filed an action on behalf of the townhome owners for breach of contract and breach of the implied warranty of habitability against M/I Homes as the general contractor and successor developer/seller of the townhomes. The Association alleged that M/I Homes’ subcontractors caused construction defects by using defective materials, conducting faulty workmanship, and failing to comply with applicable building codes. As a result, “[t]he [d]efects caused physical injury to the [t]ownhomes (i.e. altered the exterior’s appearance, shape, color or other material dimension) after construction of the [t]ownhome[ ] was completed from repeated exposure to substantially the same general conditions.” The defects included “leakage and/or uncontrolled water and/or moisture in locations in the buildings where it was not intended or expected.” The Association alleged that the “[d]efects have caused substantial damage to the [t]ownhomes and damage to other property.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    August 20, 2014 —
    Oklahoma City and San Jose, California, top lists of cities where homeowners deciding to rent rather than sell their homes could see the biggest gains. That's according to real estate information website Zillow Inc., which ran data to see what current homeowners could make if they became mom-and-pop landlords. The Okies in their state's capital city win when it comes to monthly profits: $536, or $6,431 annually. For long-term gains, the top 10 cities are those where homeowners would lose money every year by renting -- until the big payoff when they sell. Zillow translates that gain, looking back, into monthly and yearly profits. So fast-appreciating Californian cities win big, led by San Jose. (Scroll down to see the Top 10 lists; the entire list is here.) The top 10 short-term gainers range geographically from Rochester, N.Y., to Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. Monthly rental profits there are $349 and $264, respectively, or annual income of $4,182 and $3,166. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Suzanne Woolley, Bloomberg
    Ms. Woolley may be contacted at swoolley2@bloomberg.net

    Pile Test Likely for Settling Millennium Tower

    October 04, 2021 —
    A pilot pile program to prove the efficacy of a less-disruptive method for the paused foundation fix at the ailing Millennium Tower in San Francisco could begin the week of Oct. 4. Accelerated settling and tilt—caused by a pile upgrade intended to correct settlement of the 645-ft-tall residential condominium—ceased after Aug. 20, when the engineer-of-record halted the $100-million fix. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of