BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    Eleven WSHB Attorneys Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    First Suit Filed for Losses Caused by COVID-19

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Resulting Loss From Faulty Workmanship Covered

    Indictments Issued in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Presenting a “Total Time” Delay Claim Is Not Sufficient

    Giving Insurance Carrier Prompt Notice of Claim to Avoid “Untimely Notice” Defense

    Do Not Forfeit Coverage Under Your Property Insurance Policy

    Construction Spending Highest Since April 2009

    House Committee Kills Colorado's 2015 Attainable Housing Bill

    Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell Recognized in 2024 Best Law Firm® Rankings

    EPA and the Corps of Engineers Repeal the 2015 “Waters of the United States” Rule

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Limitations on the Ability to Withdraw and De-Annex Property from a Common Interest Community

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    What If an Irma-Like Hurricane Hit the New York City Metro Area?

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    Circuit Court Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Over Order Compelling Appraisal

    Architect, Engineer, and Design Professional Liens in California: A Different Animal than the Mechanics’ Lien

    Architect Responds to Defect Lawsuit over Defects at Texas Courthouse

    Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment on Conversion Claim Against Insurer

    Rio Olympic Infrastructure Costs of $2.3 Billion Are Set to Rise

    Administrative and Environmental Law Cases Decided During the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 Term

    Precast Standards' Work Under Way as Brittle Fracture Warnings Aired

    Protect Workers From Falls: A Leading Cause of Death

    Finding Insurer's Declaratory Relief Action Raises Unsettled Questions of State Law, Case is Dismissed

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    Understanding the California Consumer Privacy Act

    Construction Site Blamed for Flooding

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    The Uncertain Future of the IECC

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Delays in Filing Lead to Dismissal in Moisture Intrusion Lawsuit

    Are We Having Fun Yet? Construction In a Post-COVID World (Law Note)

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    These Pioneers Are Already Living the Green Recovery

    The Future of High-Rise is Localized and Responsive

    Rhode Island Finds Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous, Orders Coverage for Home Heating Oil Leak

    Amazon Hits Pause on $2.5B HQ2 Project in Arlington, Va.

    A Tuesday With Lisa Colon

    What’s in a Name? Trademarks and Construction

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    Construction Defects and Commercial General Liability in Illinois

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Hospital Settles Lawsuit over Construction Problems

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar

    Earth Movement Exclusion Precludes Coverage
    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

    “Pay When Paid” Provisions May Not Be Dead, at Least Not Yet

    August 24, 2020 —
    Sophisticated contractors know that in California contractual “pay when paid” provisions are enforceable but that “pay if paid” provisions are not. “Pay If Paid” v. “Pay When Paid” Provisions A “pay if paid” provision is one in which a higher tier party agrees to pay a lower tier party “if” it is paid in turn by a still higher party. Most commonly they are found in subcontracts between general contractors and subcontractors and provide that the general contractor will pay the subcontractor “if” the general contractor is paid by the project owner. However, they can also be found in subcontracts between higher and lower tiered subcontractors and between subcontractors and material suppliers and equipment lessors. In California, such provisions, which create a condition precedent to payment, namely, a condition that must precede payment to a lower tiered party, are void as a matter of law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    January 24, 2014 —
    The new LG headquarters project in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, has been challenged by various environmental groups because of what the groups see “as a blight on the Hudson River landscape,” according to the New York Times. The problem isn’t the building itself, but the proposed height of the tower: LG “plans to construct eight stories, 143 feet total, in an area previously zoned for a maximum of 35 feet. The height restriction was first lifted through a variance, which has been challenged in State Superior Court in one of two lawsuits filed to protect the view. Subsequently the land was rezoned to allow for a taller building.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Natural Resources Defense Council, and a New Jersey conservation group are continuing to fight against the removal of the height restriction. “This is like if somebody tried to build a high-rise next to Yellowstone,” Mr. Kennedy said in an interview with the New York Times. “It’s a national issue.” However, there is also local support for this project, “which LG has said will be environmentally sensitive and produce jobs,” reported the New York Times. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    February 08, 2021 —
    Economists agree that the trajectory of the current recession has been different from any other. Looking back at the 2008 economic crisis, there are noticeable trends in the construction space that indicate a surge in third-party contractor hiring could be coming in 2021. The demand for more contract work will come as no surprise for seasoned construction executives—the share of contractors at U.S. businesses has increased by 15% in the last decade. Contractors are a valuable asset in the construction industry, but organizations will need to prepare for the coming influx to ensure third-party contractors and full-time employees are set up for success to keep operations running smoothly. THE CONTRACTOR SURGE BLUEPRINT Managing a substantial influx of contractors on construction worksites can be an overwhelming task. However, with guiding principles in place, construction executives can successfully incorporate more contractors into their operations and effectively manage associated risks. Reprinted courtesy of Kim Holly, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Competitive Bidding Statute: When it Applies and When it Does Not

    April 15, 2024 —
    The University of Washington (UW), a public university, aimed to secure a real estate developer for a new building on its campus. The proposal involved an 80-year ground lease (the “Lease”), and developers submitted bids. The selected developer would demolish an existing building, construct a new one, own it during the Lease at its own cost, and UW would lease back a portion, with ownership reverting to UW at the Lease’s end. Alexandria Real Equities, Inc. (ARE) was a finalist but ultimately was not selected, and the Lease was awarded to Wexford Science and Technology, LLC (Wexford). As a result, ARE filed suit against UW asserting three claims: 1) UW lacked authority to execute the Lease, 2) UW didn’t follow required competitive bidding procedures, and 3) UW’s developer selection process was arbitrary and capricious. None of these claims were successful and ARE appealed. Division II of the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed in Alexandria Real Estate Equities Inc. v. Univ. of Wash., __ Wn. App. __, 539 P.3d 54 (2023), a published decision. The Court concluded, based on the facts in that case, that because construction was not publicly funded, UW did not have to follow competitive bidding requirements that were laid out in a statute relevant to state universities. Still, the Court applied the “bright-line cutoff point” that prohibits disappointed bidders from challenging an award once a contract has been executed. See Dick Enterprises, Inc. v. Metro. King County, 83 Wn. App. 566, 572, 922 P.2d 184 (1996). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mason Fletcher, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Fletcher may be contacted at mason.fletcher@acslawyers.com

    Construction Defect Coverage Barred Under Business Risk Exclusion in Colorado

    February 14, 2013 —
    A federal court in Colorado recently applied the business risk exclusion to a construction defect case. Aaron Mandel and Stevi Raab of Sedgwick Law discuss this in Construction Defect Coverage Quarterly. The court found that the business risk exclusion barred coverage for an underlying construction defect. In the construction defect case, the Creek Side at Parker homeowners association sued the developer and builder. One such alleged defect was that “the plumbing contractor’s faulty installation of sewer and water lines damaged the lines themselves, caused surrounding asphalt and concrete to crack and deteriorate, and resulted in water intrusion.” The court concluded that this damage to non-defective work was an occurrence, but the exclusion in the contract covered only property damage that occurred “while the work is ongoing.” The court concluded that the business risk exclusion barred coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Housing in U.S. Cools as Rate Rise Hits Sales: Mortgages

    April 28, 2014 —
    After a roller-coaster decade of boom-bust-boom, the U.S. housing market is going downhill just when many economists thought annual sales would be heading up. Sales of previously owned properties in March tumbled 7.5 percent from a year earlier to the slowest pace in 20 months, while purchases of new houses sank 14.5 percent from February, according to reports this week. Mortgage applications to buy homes plunged 19 percent from a year earlier, indicating slowing demand during what is typically the busiest season for deals. The housing market’s underlying fragility is emerging as outside influences that fueled a two-year rebound are receding. Mortgage interest rates are rising from record lows as the central bank withdraws its stimulus, and investors, who had helped drive national prices up more than 20 percent as they went on a buying spree, are now retreating. Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn and Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg

    Court Sharpens The “Sword” And Strengthens The “Shield” Of Contractors’ License Law

    July 24, 2023 —
    Performing construction work without the necessary license can have significant repercussions on a contractor’s business. California in particular has become known for its imposition of “strict and harsh” penalties for a contractor’s failure to maintain proper licensure. In the realm of public works projects, any contract with an unlicensed contractor is deemed void. See Business & Professions Code Section 7028.15(e). On private projects, California’s Contractors’ License Law prohibits contractors from maintaining any action to recover payment for their work, and more severe, may require a contractor to disgorge all funds paid to it for performing unlicensed work. See Business & Professions Code Section 7031). These methods of deterrence are referred to as the “shield” and “sword” of the Contractors’ State License Law. Loranger v. Jones, 184 Cal. App. 4th 847, 854 (2010). In any discussion surrounding licensure, it is important to review the language of the Business and Professions Code (“Bus. & Prof.”). Section 7031(a) states:
    Except as provided in subdivision (e), no person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of a contractor, may bring or maintain any action, or recover in law or equity in any action, in any court of this state for compensation for the performance of any act or contract where a license is required by this chapter without alleging that they were a duly licensed contractor at all times during the performance of that act or contract regardless of the merits of the cause of action brought by the person…
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kyle S. Case, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar & Fitzgerald LLP
    Mr. Case may be contacted at kcase@watttieder.com

    Motion for Summary Judgment Gets Pooped Upon

    December 16, 2023 —
    I’ve read some crappy motions over the years, some of which opposing counsel might even attribute to me, but I don’t think I’ve ever written about poop and motions. In Beebe v. Wonderful Pistachio & Almonds LLC, a summary judgment motion filed by a project owner sued by a construction worker for personal injuries caused by bird poop, which in turn caused a nasty fungal infection which spread to his brain, resulted in a not-so-wonderful ending for Wonderful. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com