BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut engineering consultant
    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


    What The U.S. Can Learn from China to Bring Its Buildings to New Heights

    Preparing for the 2015 Colorado Legislative Session

    New York vs. Miami: The $50 Million Penthouse Battle From Zaha Hadid

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

    Open & Known Hazards Under the Kinsman Exception to Privette

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Florida Supreme Court Decision Limits Special Damages Presented to Juries

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    Court Rejects Efforts to Limit Scope of Judgment Creditor’s Direct Action Under Insurance Code Section 11580

    No Coverage for Sink Hole Loss

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Five "Boilerplate" Terms to Negotiate in Your Next Subcontract

    Employee Screening and Testing in the Covid-19 Era: Getting Back to Work

    Protect Projects From Higher Repair Costs and Property Damage

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    California Statutes Authorizing Public-Private Partnership Contracting

    Possible Real Estate and Use and Occupancy Tax Relief for Philadelphia Commercial and Industrial Property Owners

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    Uniformity in Florida’s Construction Bond Laws Brings About Fairness for the Industry

    Additional Insured Status Survives Summary Judgment Stage

    Construction Venture Sues LAX for Nonpayment

    Legal Battle Kicks Off to Minimize Baltimore Bridge Liabilities

    Randy Maniloff Recognized by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® as a "Lawyer of the Year"

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Chinese Telecommunications Ban to Expand to Federally Funded Contracts Effective November 12, 2020

    Five Construction Payment Issues—and Solutions

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer

    Take Advantage of AI and Data Intelligence in Construction

    The Woodland Hills Office Secures a Total Defense Award on Behalf of their High-End Custom Home Builder Client!

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Faulty Workmanship Claim

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    Drought Dogs Developers in California's Soaring Housing Market

    The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract

    Arizona Court of Appeals Upholds Judgment on behalf of Homeowners against Del Webb Communities for Homes Riddled with Construction Defects

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    Perez Broke Records … But Should He Have Settled Earlier?

    Limiting Plaintiffs’ Claims to a Cause of Action for Violation of SB-800

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace

    Resulting Loss From Faulty Workmanship Covered

    Environmental Suit Against Lockheed Martin Dismissed

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard
    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

    Consumer Protections for California Residential Solar Energy Systems

    September 25, 2018 —
    It was already the case that in order to offer to install California residential solar energy systems, a contractor must be licensed by the California Contractors State License Board (CSLB) and must hold an appropriate specialty classification. Under AB 1070 enacted late last year (Chapter 662, Statutes of 2017), special consumer protections are being deployed for the benefit of homeowners. Those protections are steadily rolling out. Step one is the requirement of new Business & Professions Code (B&P Code) Section 7169 that, as of January 1, 2019, a disclosure document must be provided to consumers prior to sale and included on page 1 of the sale contract. The initial version of this document, which was developed by the CSLB and endorsed on August 23, 2018 by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), is available here. The disclosure requirement doesn’t apply to systems included in new home construction. Reprinted courtesy of Robert A. James, Pillsbury and Alexandra Brandt, Pillsbury Mr. James may be contacted at rob.james@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Brandt may be contacted at alexandra.brandt@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Start-up to Streamline Large-Scale Energy Renovation

    August 07, 2018 —
    An app from software provider GenieBelt will facilitate communications and strengthen cooperation when DGI-Byen, a 30,000 m2 business and leisure center in central Copenhagen, undergoes a large-scale energy renovation. SustainSolutions CEO Christian Niepoort expects that the tool will contribute to quality, safety, and time and cost savings. Electricians, carpenters, painters, masons, consultants, and architects; the more parties are involved, the more difficult it becomes to stick to the schedule when coordinating a whole host of supplier and contractor activities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Depreciation of Labor in Calculating Actual Cash Value Against Public Policy

    February 16, 2016 —
    The insurer's depreciation of labor in the calculation of actual cash value was found to be against Arkansas public policy. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Goodner, 2015 Ark. LEXIS 460 (Ark. Dec. 10, 2015). Shelter Mutual's policy provided that it would pay the insured "the actual cash value of all the damaged parts of the covered property." "Actual cash value" was defined as "total restoration cost less depreciation." The policy explained, "When calculating depreciation, we will include the depreciation of the materials, the labor, and the tax attributable to each party which must be replaced to allow for replacement of the damaged part, whether or not that part is damaged." 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

    Contractor Allegedly Stole Construction Materials

    October 16, 2013 —
    A Bronx man has been arrested for the theft of about $5,000 of construction materials and equipment from a New Hyde Park residence. When construction workers informed the homeowner of the missing items, the homeowner contacted Damion Brown, who apparently had previously been doing construction work at the home. Mr. Brown admitted he had taken the items but would not return them to the homeowner. The homeowner contacted police, who took M. Brown into custody. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    August 01, 2023 —
    The trial court erred in placing the burden on the policyholder to establish depreciation in determining the actual cash value of the loss. SFR Serv., LLC v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co., 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 3570 (Fla. Ct. App. May 26, 2023). The insureds' roof was damaged by Hurricane Irma. They submitted their claim to their insurer, Tower Hill. The cost of repair was assessed at $7,726.94, below the amount of the deductible. Therefore, there was no recovery under the policy. The insureds assigned their claim to SFR Services, LLC, their roofing contractor. SFR submitted a claim to Tower Hill for $162,083.84. Tower Hill refused to pay and SFR sued. 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

    Kaboom! Illinois Applies the Anti-Subrogation Rule to Require a Landlord’s Subrogating Property Insurer to Defend a Third-Party Complaint Against Tenants

    December 13, 2021 —
    In Sheckler v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co, 2021 IL App (3d) 190500, 2021 Ill. App. LEXIS 593, Auto-Owners Insurance Company (Insurer) paid its insured, Ronald McIntosh (McIntosh), for property damage following a fire in an apartment he rented to Monroe and Dorothy Sheckler (the Shecklers). Insurer filed suit against Wayne Workman (Workman), who performed service work on an oven in the Shecklers’ apartment that leaked gas and resulted in a fire. Workman filed a third-party complaint against the Shecklers for contribution and the Shecklers tendered the defense of the claim to Insurer. Insurer refused the tender and the Shecklers filed a declaratory judgment action. In the court below, the Shecklers argued that, as tenants, they were co-insureds on McIntosh’s property insurance policy. Following a liberal interpretation of precedent from the Supreme Court of Illinois in Dix Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaFramboise, 597 N.E. 2d 622 (Ill. 1992), an Illinois appellate court ruled that Insurer – who provided property insurance – must defend the tenants of a rental property from contribution claims if the tenants are co-insureds under the landlord’s policy. In Sheckler, the Shecklers hired Workman to fix a broken burner on a gas stove. Finding that additional parts were needed, Workman left while the Shecklers waited inside. While waiting—and despite the smell of gas filling the kitchen—Mr. Sheckler lit the stove. “Kaboom!” wrote the appellate court when describing the scene. A fire erupted and caused substantial damage to the apartment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan Bennett, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at bennettr@whiteandwilliams.com

    Not If, But When: Newly Enacted Virginia Legislation Bans “Pay-If-Paid” Clauses In Construction Contracts

    August 22, 2022 —
    Recently passed legislation in Virginia is likely to dramatically change contractual relationships between prime contractors and subcontractors in the Commonwealth. Abrogating well-established common-law principles set forth by the Supreme Court of Virginia, on April 27, 2022, the Virginia General Assembly, after receiving input from Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, passed Senate Bill 550 banning “pay-if-paid” clauses in public and private construction contracts. Contractors performing work in Virginia should take note of the new law, which goes into effect next year and will apply to any contracts executed after January 1, 2023. The History Of Pay-if-Paid Clauses In Virginia Broadly speaking, “pay-if-paid” clauses are a commonly used tool by prime contractors on construction projects to shift the risk to subcontractors in the event that the owner does not pay the prime contractor for work. Such clauses usually include language creating an express condition precedent to the subcontractor’s right to be paid for work under a subcontract, stating that the prime contractor shall be under no obligation to pay the subcontractor for work unless and until the prime contractor first receives payment for that work by the project owner. The “pay-if-paid” clause also has a less extreme cousin, the “pay-when-paid” clause, which merely delays the time in which the prime contractor is obligated to pay the subcontractor to the time in which the prime contractor is paid by the owner. It does not, however, extinguish the prime contractor’s ultimate obligation to pay the subcontractor. Reprinted courtesy of Joseph A. Figueroa, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) and Thomas E. Minnis, Watt, Tieder, Hoffar, & Fitzgerald, LLP (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Figueroa may be contacted at jfigueroa@watttieder.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    You Have Choices (Litigation Versus Mediation)

    December 14, 2020 —
    As I sit here thinking about an impending trial in the Goochland County General District Court, it hit me that I also serve as a mediator in that court from time to time. Coincidentally, I will be “wearing both hats” (litigator and mediator) this week on back to back days. It will be interesting to have to switch roles so quickly on back to back days. While I don’t have the results of this thought experiment as I sit here typing this post, the timeline does bring into focus the two possible avenues to resolve a dispute. Neither is perfect and either works in the proper situation. Both lend a final “result” and closure to the dispute, they just each do so in a different manner and with a different role for me, the construction attorney/construction mediator. 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