BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    Ambiguity in Insurance Policy will be Interpreted in Favor of Insurance Coverage

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    Can General Contractors Make Subcontractors Pay for OSHA Violations?

    Court Upholds Denial of Collapse Coverage Where Building Still Stands

    Yet ANOTHER Reminder to Always Respond

    Property Damage Caused By Construction Next Door Covered as Ensuing Loss

    Storm Debby Is Deadly — Because It’s Slow

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    Residential Construction Surges in Durham

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    Washington Supreme Court Upholds King County Ordinance Requiring Utility Providers to Pay for Access to County’s Right-of-Way and Signals Approval for Other Counties to Follow Suit

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

    Mortenson Subcontractor Fires Worker Over Meta Data Center Noose

    Insurer Beware: Failure to Defend Ends with Hefty Verdict

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

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

    Witt Named to 2017 Super Lawyers

    The ALI Restatement – What Lies Ahead?

    Was Jury Right in Negligent Construction Case?

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Condo Developers Buy in Washington despite Construction Defect Litigation

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects

    Luxury Homes Push City’s Building Permits Past $7.5 Million

    Las Vegas Team Obtains Complete Dismissal of a Traumatic Brain Injury Claim

    Buildings Don't Have To Be Bird-Killers

    Manhattan Luxury Condos Sit on Market While Foreign Buyers Wait

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

    Best Lawyers Honors Hundreds of Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Names Four Partners ‘Lawyers of the Year’

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    Labor Shortages In Construction

    Release Language Extended To Successor Entity But Only Covered “Known” Claims

    Cincinnati Team Secures Summary Judgment for Paving Company in Trip-and-Fall Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/08/23) – The Build America, Buy America Act, ESG Feasibility, and University Partnerships

    Montana Federal Court Holds that an Interior Department’s Federal Advisory Committee Was Improperly Reestablished

    The “Ugly” Property Next Door is Ruining My Property Value

    California to Require Disclosure of Construction Defect Claims

    The Power of Planning: Four Key Themes for Mitigating Risk in Construction

    COVID-19 Win for Policyholders! Court Approves "Direct Physical Loss" Argument

    Court Holds That Insurance Producer Cannot Be Liable for Denial of COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim

    Insurance Coverage for COVID-19? Two N.J. Courts Allow Litigation to Proceed

    #2 CDJ Topic: Valley Crest Landscape v. Mission Pools

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    Colorado Passes Compromise Bill on Construction Defects

    Tenth Circuit Reverses District Court's Ruling that Contractor Entitled to a Defense

    The Impact of Sopris Lodging v. Schofield Excavation on Timeliness of Colorado Construction Defect Claims
    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. Drawing 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

    Insurer Must Indemnify Additional Insured After Settlement

    October 21, 2015 —
    The court determined that Target was an additional insured under its supplier's policy and the insurer had a duty to indemnify Target after it settled the underlying suit. Selective Ins. Co. v. Target Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123230 (E.D. Ill. Sept. 15, 2015). Angela Brown sued Target when she was allegedly injured by a door to a fitting room that came unhinged and fell on her head. Harbor Industries, Inc. supplied Target with its fitting rooms. Pursuant to the "Supplier Qualification Agreement" (SQA), Harbor named Target as an additional insured under its policy with Selective Insurance Company. The SQA became effective and was to remain in effect until terminated by either party. A second agreement, the "Program Agreement," set forth the terms under which Harbor sold the fitting rooms to Target. The Program Agreement went into effect on April 23, 2009, and expired on July 1, 2010. Brown's injury occurred on December 17, 2011, while the SQA and the policy were in effect, but after the Program Agreement expired. After Brown's injury, Target tendered to Selective, who denied coverage, contending Target was not an additional insured. The policy's endorsement expanded insureds to any additional insured whom Harbor agreed in a written contract to add as an additional insured. Selective filed suit and the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. 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

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss

    January 28, 2014 —
    The insured's bad faith claim based upon the insurer's alleged use of an independent contractor to assess the amount of loss in order to lower the amount paid survived a motion to dismiss. Williamson v. Chubb Indem. Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178022 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 19, 2013). The insureds' home was damaged. Chubb, their insurer, retained an independent contractor, Eastern Diversified Services (EDS) to assess the amount of loss. EDS estimated the loss to be $193,270.43, and Chubb paid this amount. Chubb's standard practice was to conduct damage estimates itself using an estimating program called Symbility. EDS used a different program with a data base creating lower payments for loss. When this was brought to Chubb's attention, Chubb refused to recalculate the plaintiff's estimate. 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

    Bert L. Howe & Associates to Join All-Star Panel at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    March 26, 2014 —
    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates, a consulting firm, will join fellow panelists Hon. Peter Lichtman (ret), Hon. Nancy Wieben Stock (ret), Peter S. Curry, Brian Kahn, Esq., and Paul R. Kiesel, Esq in a break-out discussion entitled “Working Smarter with Technology” at this year’s West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar being held May 15th-16th at the world-famous Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim, California. West Coast Casualty's Construction Defect Seminar is the largest seminar of its kind worldwide focusing on all of the elements of the prosecution, defense, coverage and technologies of construction defect claims and litigation from a national perspective. With offices in California, Nevada, Colorado, Florida and Texas (Houston & San Antonio), Bert L. Howe & Associates provides construction consulting and expert witness services to insurance professionals and lawyers specializing in construction defect litigation, construction risk analysis, and property claims arising from construction-related activities. Download an Invitation and Register... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    With Wildfires at a Peak, “Firetech” Is Joining Smart City Lineups

    October 21, 2024 —
    The threat of extreme wildfires has doubled in the past 20 years, with almost 20,000 fires blazing across the United States in 2024 alone. These high-intensity fires can be deadly, expensive, and create lingering health and environmental consequences. While we are used to seeing firefighters on the frontlines, researchers hope that next-generation smart technology, augmented by artificial intelligence (AI), will also play a key role in battling these conflagrations. Many municipalities, particularly those near wildfire-prone forests, are beginning to incorporate fire-focused advances (or “firetech”) into their smart city ecosystems. “Smart cities” are urban centers enhanced by utilities, emergency services, traffic signals and more that are linked through information and communications technology. Though the concept can spark cybersecurity-related concerns, many locales are gradually implementing many different kinds of smart tech. Following the 2023 wildfire that devastated Maui, for example, Hawaii installed a network of cloud-based fire and wind sensors that use AI to detect wildfires in real time. Smart tools like these can aid in predicting and discovering fires, streamlining emergency alert protocols, calculating vital analytics and improving firefighter safety. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is actively studying these innovations, particularly in terms of environmental (smart buildings or robotics), operational (communications) and personnel (PPE sensors or biometrics). Below are a few of the key technologies to watch in this emerging field:
    • Smart Sensors. A total of 80 sensors (64 wildfire sensors and 16 wind sensors) were placed throughout Hawaii starting in March of 2024. Attached to existing utility poles, they detect heat in the air, and then engage AI and smart learning to distinguish smoke particles and gases produced by fires from those commonly found in Hawaii’s atmosphere—such as volcanic ash and ocean salt. Positioned in “strings,” the sensors “talk” to each other and send text messages to officials when they find a problem.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James P. Bobotek, Pillsbury
    Mr. Bobotek may be contacted at james.bobotek@pillsburylaw.com

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    November 20, 2013 —
    Key Construction, the contractor of a downtown Wichita, Kansas mixed-use development has been sued by the condominium association of the development’s condo building. The WaterWalk Place Owners Association claims that the balconies on the building do not drain properly. Additionally, the suit claims that the building has water intrusion problems due to inappropriate or missing sealant at windows, doors, and expansion joints. Key Construction says that they are dealing with the problems and describe the suit as due to “a deadline pushing on” the residents. Wyatt Hock, the attorney for the residents, says that he hopes for a settlement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Liability Policy’s Arbitration Endorsement Applies to Third Party Beneficiaries, Including Additional Insureds

    May 11, 2020 —
    In Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co. v. SMG Holdings, Inc. (No. C082841; filed 12/31/19, ord. pub. 1/28/20), a California appeals court held that a binding arbitration clause in an insurance policy extends to a third party, such as an additional insured. In Philadelphia v. SMG, Philadelphia issued a general liability policy to a youth organization, Future Farmers of America (FFA), that had contracted to use the Fresno Convention Center for its annual convention. The contract required FFA to obtain liability insurance and to name the property manager, SMG, and the City of Fresno, as additional insureds. Philadelphia issued FFA a commercial lines CGL policy with an endorsement affording coverage to “managers, landlords, or lessors of premises” for “liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of that part of the premises leased or rented” to the named insured. It also covered “any person or organization where required by a written contract executed prior to the occurrence” but only for liability arising from the named insured’s negligence. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor’s Claim for Interest on Subcontractor’s Defective Work Claim Gains Mixed Results

    April 27, 2020 —
    This case concerns calculation of a damages award to a general contractor, Skanska USA Building, Inc., on its claim for breach of contract against its masonry subcontractor, J.D. Long Masonry, Inc., arising from Long’s faulty construction of a masonry façade at a medical research facility in Baltimore. When the façade collapsed and Long failed to repair it, Skanska hired a replacement subcontractor, C.A. Lindman, to remediate Long’s defective work and filed suit against Long to recover the resulting damages. After the court granted Skanska’s motion for summary judgment as to liability, Skanska moved for summary judgment on the issue of damages, relying on the indemnification provision of the subcontract to seek compensatory damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and litigation fees. In the subcontract, Long agreed to indemnify and hold Skanska harmless from all claims, losses, costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising before or after completion of Long’s work, caused by, arising out of, resulting from, or occurring in connection with Long’s performance of the work or breach of the subcontract. The court first applied the terms of this provision to award Skanska compensatory damages, holding that Skanska was, as a matter of law, entitled to recover the amount of the Lindman subcontract and general conditions incurred to supervise remediation of Long’s work. The court, however, denied Skanska’s claim for pre-judgment interest on the entirety of these damages. Skanska asserted that it was entitled to pre-judgment interest on the full award, calculated from the date on which it first paid Lindman. The court disagreed, explaining that, under Maryland law, a claimant is entitled to an award of pre-judgment interest as of right only when the amount due is certain, definite and liquidated by a specific date prior to judgment. The court reasoned that, because much of the Lindman subcontract value was composed of later-executed change orders, an award of pre-judgment interest could not be uniformly calculated back to the date of Skanska’s first payment to Lindman. And moreover, because Skanska continued to withhold sums due to Lindman pending resolution of certain issues, awarding Skanska pre-judgment interest on amounts it had not yet paid would result in a “windfall” to Skanska because there was no “use of income” loss to be compensated. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John J. Gazzola, Pepper Hamilton LLP
    Mr. Gazzola may be contacted at gazzolaj@pepperlaw.com

    Owners Should Serve Request for Sworn Statement of Account on Lienor

    August 10, 2017 —
    When an owner receives a construction lien, an owner should serve the lienor with a Request for Sworn Statement of Account. The Request for Sworn Statement is authorized by Florida Statute s. 713.16(2) and should be in the following form: REQUEST FOR SWORN STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT WARNING: YOUR FAILURE TO FURNISH THE REQUESTED STATEMENT, SIGNED UNDER OATH, WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THE FURNISHING OF A FALSE STATEMENT WILL RESULT IN THE LOSS OF YOUR LIEN. To: (Lienor’s name and address) The undersigned hereby demands a written statement under oath of his or her account showing the nature of the labor or services performed and to be performed, if any, the materials furnished, the materials to be furnished, if known, the amount paid on account to date, the amount due, and the amount to become due, if known, as of the date of the statement for the improvement of real property identified as (property description) . (name of contractor) (name of the lienor’s customer, as set forth in the lienor’s Notice to Owner, if such notice has been served) (signature and address of owner) (date of request for sworn statement of account) From both an owner and lienor’s perspective, the bolded, capitalized language is key. It states that if the lienor fails to respond under oath within 30 days, it will LOSE its lien. That is a very punitive measure for a lienor’s failure to respond, meaning a lienor should absolutely respond, no questions asked. Plus, a lienor’s response to a Request for Sworn Statement of Account is not a burdensome ordeal. 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