BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expert
    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


    Health Care Construction Requires Compassion, Attention to Detail and Flexibility

    OSHA Issues Fines for Fatal Building Collapse in Philadelphia

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    Minnesota Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade for the Second Time

    Insurer Not Responsible for Insured's Assignment of Policy Benefits

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Last Parcel of Rancho del Oro Masterplan Purchased by Cornerstone Communties

    Florida’s Citizens Property Insurance May Be Immune From Bad Faith, But Is Not Immune From Consequential Damages

    You Cannot Arbitrate Claims Not Covered By The Arbitration Agreement

    Reroof Blamed for $10 Million in Damage

    Rising Construction Disputes Require Improved Legal Finance

    Contractor Changes Contract After Signed, Then Sues Older Woman for Breaking It

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

    Colorado Supreme Court Issues Decisions on Statute of Limitations for Statutory Bad Faith Claims and the Implied Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    #11 CDJ Topic: Cortez Blu Community Association, Inc. v. K. Hovnanian at Cortez Hill, LLC, et al.

    Business Risk Exclusions (j) 5 and (j) 6 Found Ambiguous

    Ohio Court of Appeals: Absolution Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage for Workplace Coal-Tar Pitch Exposure Claims

    11th Circuit Affirms Bad Faith Judgement Against Primary Insurer

    Not so Fast! How Does Revoking Acceleration of a Note Impact the Statute of Limitations?

    California Complex Civil Litigation Superior Court Panels

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

    The Hidden Dangers of Construction Defect Litigation

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LESLIE KING O'NEAL

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Understand the Dispute Resolution Provision You Are Agreeing To

    Choice of Law Provisions in Construction Contracts

    Green Construction Claims: More of the Same

    Cameron Kalunian to Speak at Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    Blueprint for Change: How the Construction Industry Should Respond to the FTC’s Ban on Noncompetes

    Design-build Trends, Challenges and Risk Mitigation

    Fifth Circuit Concludes Government’s CAA Legal Claims are Time-Barred But Injunctive-Relief Claims are Not

    Pollution Exclusion Prevents Coverage for Injury Caused by Insulation

    Payne & Fears LLP Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2024 “Best Law Firms” Rankings

    NLRB Finalizes Rule for Construction Industry Unions to Obtain Majority Support Representational Status

    Pennsylvania “occurrence”

    The Cheapest Place to Buy a House in the Hamptons

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    Constructive Suspension (Suspension Outside of an Express Order)

    Court of Appeals Finds Arbitration Provision Incorporated by Reference Unenforceable

    Texas Supreme Court Authorizes Exception to the "Eight-Corners" Rule

    Appellate Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    You Can Take This Job and Shove It!

    Commercial Real Estate Brokerages in an Uncertain Russian Market

    Repair of Part May Necessitate Replacement of Whole
    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

    Court Upholds Denial of Collapse Coverage Where Building Still Stands

    October 02, 2018 —
    The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision finding the policy's collapse coverage did not apply. Cmty. Garage v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 2680 (Mich. Ct. App. June 19, 2018). The insured operated a truck repair business. In June 2016, the insured's place of business sustained damage due to failure of several trusses providing structural support to the building's roof. The failure was due to latent construction defects leading to an insufficient load bearing capacity. The roof began to sag while one of the walls bulged outward due to the sudden pressure overload. The insured hired a construction firm to install temporary shoring to support the roof and prevent further damage. All of the building's walls remained standing and, although the roof sagged, it also remained intact. However, the building could not be safely occupied until repairs were completed. 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 Quick Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Timing Refresher

    February 27, 2023 —
    As those who read Construction Law Musings on a regular basis know, mechanic’s liens are a big part of my construction law practice. These tricky and strictly enforced statutory collection tools are very powerful when correctly recorded and utterly useless if they aren’t recorded in a timely fashion and with the correct information contained within them. Couple that fact with recent changes to the mechanic’s lien form in 2019, and I feel the need to give a quick refresher. If you’ve kept up with Musings, you know about the two big numbers for Virginia mechanic’s lien timing, 90 and 150. These should be kept in mind for every general contractor, subcontractor, or supplier on any construction project in Virginia. Virginia Code Section 43-4 sets out the reasons to keep these numbers in mind. The code section sets out why you need to know these numbers. The 90 refers to the deadline for recording a lien. This number affects the right to a lien in Virginia. In order to preserve lien rights, a construction contractor must record the lien within ninety days of the last day of the last month in which the last work was performed or no later than ninety days from the date of completion of the project or other termination of work. The short version is that most general contractors on commercial projects have 90 days from the last work in which to record their lien and most subcontractors have 90 days from the last day of the last month of work. However, the best practice is to simply calculate the 90 days from the last work performed or material supplied to avoid issues and arguments between attorneys regarding timing. 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

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

    July 19, 2011 —

    Judge Marilyn Kelly of the Michigan Supreme Court has remanded the case of Miller-Davis Co. v. Ahrens Constr. Inc. (Mich., 2011) to the Court of Appeals, after determining that the court had improperly applied the statute of repose. She reversed their judgment, pending a new trial.

    Ahrens Construction was a subcontractor, hired by Miller-Davis to build and install a natatorium room at a YMCA camp in Kalamazoo, Michigan. After its installation, the YMCA discovered a severe condensation problem, causing moisture to “rain” from the roof. The architect, testifying for Miller-Davis, alleged that the problems were due to improper installation by Ahrens. Ahrens claimed that the condensation problem was due to a design error.

    When the roof was removed and reconstructed, the moisture problem ended. Ahrens argued that the alleged defects were caused by the removal. Further, in trial Ahrens raised the issue of the statute of repose. The court found in favor of Miller-Davis and did not address the statute of repose.

    The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, determining that the statute of repose had barred the suit. This rendered the other issues moot.

    The Michigan Supreme concluded that the issue at hand was “a suit for breach of contract,” and that the Michigan statute of repose is limited to tort actions. They remanded the case to the Court of Appeals to address the issues that had been mooted by the application of the statute of repose.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    University of Tennessee Commits to $1.9B Capital Plan

    August 07, 2023 —
    A nearly $2-billion funding plan approved by University of Tennessee trustees signals the go-ahead for 15 new capital projects at five locations including research, science and housing facilities along with a planned entertainment district for Neyland Stadium, home of the university's football team. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at enr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

    May 10, 2021 —
    There is value to a seller when it comes to entering into an as-is transaction and stating that the seller has NOT made any representation or warranty, all such representations or warranties are disclaimed, the buyer is NOT relying on any representation of the seller, and that the buyer is relying on its own inspection of the property. This shifts the onus to the buyer to undertake the inspection or due diligence it needs to take relating to the property it wants to buy. With respect to commercial property transactions:
    The doctrine of caveat emptor, which Florida courts continue to apply, “places the duty to examine and judge the value and condition of the property solely on the buyer and protects the seller from liability for any defects.” There are, however, three exceptions to this doctrine, including: “1) where some artifice or trick has been employed to prevent the purchaser from making independent inquiry; 2) where the other party does not have equal opportunity to become apprised of the fact; and, 3) where a party undertakes to disclose facts and fails to disclose the whole truth.” Florida Holding 4800, LLC v. Lauderhill Mall Investment, LLC, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D785b (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
    These three exceptions to caveat emptor, or the doctrine of buyer beware, are not easy to prove because it places a burden on a buyer to prove an active effort from the seller to conceal a material fact to skirt around the as-is language. Again, this is not an easy burden to prove. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Pennsylvania Modernizes State Building Code

    October 30, 2018 —
    The Pennsylvania Independent Regulatory Review Commission has updated the state’s Uniform Construction Code to align with the 2015 International Code —a family of comprehensive and coordinated building codes used in all 50 states that are updated regularly and take into account the latest health and safety technology and building science advancements. Reprinted courtesy of Joanna Masterson, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Five Frequently Overlooked Points of Construction Contracts

    October 18, 2021 —
    There is no shortage of articles addressing the key points of construction contracts. Just enter that phrase into any internet search engine and you will find plenty. It should go without saying that a construction contract should be in writing, it should clearly identify the scope of work to be performed and the sums to be paid for that work, and it should address the parties’ rights and responsibilities with regard to termination or suspension of the contract, correcting defective work, and handling claims and disputes—just to name a few. Of course, these items should receive their due consideration. Too often, however, other important aspects of the construction contract get shortchanged. This article aims the spotlight on five often overlooked aspects of construction contracts. Project Schedules Surprisingly, many construction contracts pay little attention to a central component of any construction project: the project schedule. Many contracts provide the dates of commencement and substantial completion but not much else. With the frequent use of project management techniques such as the Critical Path Method (CPM) and the associated software, it is easier than ever to identify which tasks should be prioritized and identify potential areas of delay. The owner’s contract with the general contractor should clearly define the scheduling methods used and provide measures to keep the parties informed of the progress of the work. By including basic scheduling requirements in the contract documents—such as the submission of “Baseline Project Schedules” (consistent with the contract time provisions), “Schedule Progress Updates” (comparing the progress of the work against the Baseline Project Schedule), and “Schedule Recovery Plans” (when Schedule Project Updates indicate projected delays)—the parties can avoid or reduce disputes over project delays that often lead to litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig H. O'Neill, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    July 30, 2014 —
    This year, the California State Fair is displaying “four modern, environmentally friendly cabins” as “part of the ‘revamp the camps’ mission by the Forward Parks Commission, California State Parks and 12 architecture graduate students at Cal Poly Pomona,” according to the Sacramento Bee. The commission’s purpose is “to find solutions for the financial, cultural and population changes affecting state parks” including “drawing millennials and urban residents who live far from traditional state parks.” Guidelines stated that the cabins “had to be portable, accessible to the physically disabled and made from sustainable materials.” Furthermore the cabins had to be under $15,000 each, have no running water or electricity, and “[y]et the design had to appeal to a younger market.” “After a review of the surveys and recommendations from the Parks Forward Commission, the hope is to place the prototypes in state parks for public use,” the Sacramento Bee reported. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of