BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineers
    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


    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Brown Paint Doesn’t Cover Up Construction Defects

    Colorado House Bill 17-1279 – A Misguided Attempt at Construction Defect Reform

    Los Angeles Tower Halted Over Earthquake and other Concerns

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insurance Coverage Lawsuit In Construction Defect Case

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    Be Careful in Contracting and Business

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    EPA Coal Ash Cleanup Rule Changes Send Utilities, Agencies Back to Drawing Board

    Sustainability Puts Down Roots in Real Estate

    Colorado Senate Committee Approves Construction Defect Bill

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    AGC’s 2024 Construction Outlook. Infrastructure is Bright but Office-Geddon is Not

    Reversing Itself, Alabama Supreme Court Finds Construction Defect is An Occurrence

    On-Site Supersensing and the Future of Construction Automation – Discussion with Aviad Almagor

    New Jersey Law Firm Sued for Malpractice in Construction Defect Litigation

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    2023’s Bank Failures: What Contractors, Material Suppliers and Equipment Lessors Can Do to Protect Themselves

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/04/23) – NFL Star Gets into Real Estate, DOJ Focuses on “Buyer-Broker Commissions”, and the Auto Workers’ Strike Continues

    Safety Versus a False Sense of Security: Challenges to the Use of Construction Cranes

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Give a Little Extra …”

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Construction Continues To Boom Across The South

    Subcontractor Strikes Out in its Claims Against Federal Government

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    Water Alone is Not Property Damage under a CGL policy in Connecticut

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Reminder: Your Accounting and Other Records Matter

    Appeals Court Rules that Vertical and Not Horizontal Exhaustion Applies to Primary and First-Layer Excess Insurance

    Luxury-Apartment Boom Favors D.C.’s Millennial Renters

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    Four Things Construction Professionals Need to Know About Asbestos

    Examining Construction Defect as Occurrence in Recent Case Law and Litigation

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    Return-to-Workplace Checklist: Considerations and Emerging Best Practices for Employers

    Not So Unambiguous: California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Additional Insured

    FDOT Races to Re-Open Storm-Damaged Pensacola Bridge

    Defeating the Ten-Year Statute of Repose For Latent Construction Defects

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tear Down This Wall!”

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Confirms: Construction Defect Claims Not Covered by CGL Policies

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    Netflix Plans $900M Facility At Former New Jersey Army Base

    Coping with Labor & Install Issues in Green Building

    Deescalating Hyper Escalation
    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

    August Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Appreciate at Faster Pace

    October 28, 2015 —
    Home prices in 20 U.S. cities rose at a faster pace in the year ended August, a sign the industry continues to strengthen on improving demand. The S&P/Case-Shiller index of property values climbed 5.1 percent from August 2014 after rising 4.9 percent in the year ended in July, the group said Tuesday in New York. The gain was the biggest in a year and matched the median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Nationally, prices increased 4.7 percent after a 4.6 percent advance in the 12 months through July. A tight supply has supported price appreciation, which may in turn entice more owners to put their properties on the market as the payoff grows. More homes that are affordable for first-time or young buyers will be needed to keep the housing recovery on track, providing a boost to consumer spending in the process. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Victoria Stilwell, Bloomberg

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    December 16, 2023 —
    Introduction In a matter of “first impression,” on November 30, 2023, the Appellate Division affirmed the New Jersey Superior Court decision in Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Pennsauken Joint Venture v. Township of Pennsauken and Terminal Construction Corp., finding that the New Jersey Public Works Contractor Registration Act, N.J.S.A. 34:11-56.48 to -56.57 (“PWCRA” or the “Act”), applies to a joint venture formed for the sole purpose of bidding on a public works contract. Therefore, the Court held that the PWCRA requires any joint venture bidding on public works projects in New Jersey to be registered under the Act at the time of bid submission. Accordingly, the Township of Pennsauken acted within its authority and properly rejected the bid submission of the Ernest Bock & Sons-Dobco Joint Venture which was not registered under the Act in the name of the joint venture at the time of its bid submission, despite the individual members of the joint venture being registered. Reprinted courtesy of Nicholas J. Zaita, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Brian Glicos, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Zaita may be contacted at nzaita@pecklaw.com Mr. Glicos may be contacted at bglicos@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Trust Fund Statutes: Know What’s Required in the State Where Your Project Is Underway

    June 22, 2020 —
    Construction trust fund statutes have been around for decades. At least 15 states have passed similar statutes. Other states, but not all, do not have an express statute but have interpreted state law to hold that payments received by a general contractor and deposited in a business account establishes a “trust fund.” See e.g., Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7108. The purpose of these laws is straightforward—protect contractors and suppliers against nonpayment for the labor and materials provided for the construction or repair of property. But while the purpose is straightforward, each state’s law differs by imposing different requirements, different privileges, and different remedies. This article provides an overview of how these statutes work as well as a sampling of important requirements and potential pitfalls that you should look out for when a construction trust fund statute applies to your project. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher D. Cazenave, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Cazenave may be contacted at ccazenave@joneswalker.com

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Limits The Scope Of A Builder’s Implied Warranty Of Habitability

    September 10, 2014 —
    In Conway v. Cutler Group, Inc., -- A.3d --, 2014 WL 4064261 (Pa.), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania addressed the question of whether a subsequent home buyer can recover from a home builder pursuant to the builder’s implied warranty of habitability, a warranty that protects those who purchase a newly constructed home from latent defects. Concluding that a builder’s warranty of habitability is grounded in contract, the Court held that a subsequent purchaser of a previously inhabited home cannot recover damages from a builder-vendor based on the builder-vendor’s breach of the implied warranty of habitability. The Court’s decision leaves unanswered the question of whether a purchaser who is also the first user-purchaser of a new home can pursue a breach of warranty action against a builder with whom the purchaser is not in privity of contract. In Conway, the Cutler Group, Inc. (Cutler) sold a new home to Davey and Holly Fields. The Fields subsequently sold the home to Michael and Deborah Conway. After the Conways discovered water infiltration problems in their home, they filed a one-count complaint against Cutler, alleging that Cutler breached its implied warranty of habitability. In response to the Conways’ complaint, Cutler filed preliminary objections, arguing that the warranty of habitability extends from the builder only to the first purchaser of a newly constructed home. The trial court sustained Cutler’s preliminary objections based on the lack of contractual privity between the parties and the Conways appealed the trial court’s decision. On appeal, the Superior Court reversed, stating that the implied warranty of habitability is based on public policy considerations and exists independently of any representations by the builder, and even in the absence of an express contract between the builder and the purchaser. Cutler appealed the Superior Court’s decision to the Supreme Court. To address the question of whether the implied warranty of habitability extends to a subsequent purchaser of a used residence, the Court discussed the history of the implied warranty of habitability in Pennsylvania. As stated by the Court, the Court adopted the implied warranty of habitability in the context of new home sales to reject the traditional doctrine of caveat emptor (buyer beware) because the purchaser of a new home justifiably relies on the skill of the developer. Thus, as between the builder-vendor and the buyer, the builder should bear the risk that the home he builds is habitable and functional. In adopting the doctrine, the Court noted that the doctrine is rooted in the existence of a contract – an agreement of sale – between the builder-vendor and the buyer. Reprinted courtesy of Edward A. Jaeger, Jr., White and Williams LLP and William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP Mr. Jaeger may be contacted at jaegere@whiteandwilliams.com; Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    November 13, 2013 —
    A Texas man is suing the contractor who built his pool alleging that within months of construction, the pool began to crack and leak water. According to the lawsuit from Larry Merendino, when the concrete contractor, PC Construction, removed some concrete, they found PVC joints that were not glued properly and were leaking. Mr. Merendino is suing the company and five other firms, claiming that the construction of his pool was negligent and that the companies operated by deceptive trade practices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    More thoughts on Virginia Mechanic’s Liens

    January 28, 2019 —
    As we settled yet another construction case on the courthouse steps today, I began to think about what I should post to begin 2009. Of course, given the construction industry slowdown that is predicted, and the trend at construction projects around the Commonwealth of Virginia that looks to me as if payments will be harder to come by from Owners less willing, for financial reasons, to work with contractors, mechanic’s liens will be more useful, and necessary, now than ever. Virginia mechanic’s liens are unusually strong because your memorandum of lien takes priority over all prior liens on the property that you have improved (including from the bank that is financing the project) except in very limited circumstances. What this means is that, should you properly file and sue to enforce your lien, you get to foreclose and have first crack at any money. By contrast, a judgment lien takes priority only over liens filed after the lien is recorded. 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

    A Court-Side Seat: An End-of-Year Environmental Update

    January 09, 2023 —
    As 2022 draws to a close, here is a brief description of recent environmental and regulatory law rulings, as well as new federal rulemaking proceedings. United States Tax Court
    Green Valley Investors, LLC et al, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue On November 9, 2022, the Tax Court agreed with the taxpayers that the IRS’s use of administrative Notice 2017-10 to impose substantial tax liabilities violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The notice was the agency’s response to a provision in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 which increased the penalties for engaging in a reportable transaction understatement. Here, at issue was the value of charitable deductions generated by the creation of environmental easements made in connection with land transactions. These claimed deductions amounted to more than $60 million. The petitioners argued that IRS Notice 2017-10, which authorized such large penalties, was in fact a “legislative rule” whose promulgation should have complied with the notice and comment requirements of the APA. The agency contended that the Congress, by implication, absolved the IRS from the notice and comment requirements. The court agreed with the petitioners and set aside Notice 2017-10 and the imposition of penalties under Section 6662A of the Jobs Creation Act. On December 8, 2022, the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would correct the APA deficiencies noted by the courts. (See 87 FR 75185.)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Ohio School Board and Contractor Meet to Discuss Alleged Defects

    July 30, 2014 —
    According to Insurance News, The Greeneview School Board will be meeting with contractor Sfaffco Construction Inc. to discuss findings in a 122-page report produced by “Mays Consulting & Evaluation Services Inc. that outlines numerous alleged construction defects in the roofing system.” "It's really the first time we have everybody together to discuss the deficiencies," said Isaac Seevers, the Greeneview Local Schools superintendent told Insurance News. The school board estimates that the alleged problems will take up to $3.5 million to fix. Meanwhile, Staffco has hired their own consultant. "The report from Mays is one sided," Staffco President Jon Stafford said according to Insurance News. "We take issue with some of the findings in there." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of