BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims 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


    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction

    Meet Some Key Players in 2020 Environmental Litigation

    EPA Issues New PFAS Standard, Provides $1B for Testing, Cleanup of 'Forever Chemicals'

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    Sept. 11 Victims Rejected by U.S. High Court on Lawsuit

    Three Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    How Long Does a Civil Lawsuit Take?

    Classify Workers Properly to Avoid Expensive Penalties

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    New York: The "Loss Transfer" Opportunity to Recover Otherwise Non-Recoverable First-Party Benefits

    Mississippi River Spends 40 Days At Flood Stage, Mayors Push for Infrastructure Funding

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    Municipal Ordinances Create Additional Opportunities for the Defense of Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    Harmon Tower Case Settled Prior to Start of Trial

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

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

    Dispute Over Amount Insured Owes Public Adjuster Resolved

    Requesting an Allocation Between Covered and Non-Covered Damages? [Do] Think Twice, It’s [Not Always] All Right.

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    San Francisco House that Collapsed Not Built to Plan

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera Obtain Voluntary Dismissal in Favor of Construction Company Under the Vertical Immunity Doctrine

    Include Contract Clauses for Protection Against Ever-Evolving Construction Challenges

    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

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    CDJ’s #6 Topic of the Year: Does Colorado Need Construction Defect Legislation to Spur Affordable Home Development?

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    Deference Given To Procuring Public Agency Regarding Material Deviation

    FAA Seeks Largest Fine Yet on Drones in Near-Miss Crackdown

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

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

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Navigating the New Landscape: How AB 12 and SB 567 Impact Landlords and Tenants in California

    Montreal Bridge Builders Sue Canada Over New Restrictions

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of anti-SLAPP Motion in Dispute Over Construction of Church Facilities

    Pay-if-Paid Clauses, Nasty, but Enforceable

    Don’t Let Construction Problems Become Construction Disputes (guest post)

    ¡AI Caramba!

    New California Construction Law for 2019

    General Contractor Supporting a Subcontractor’s Change Order Only for Owner to Reject the Change

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

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

    US Moves to Come Clean on PFAS in Drinking Water

    Construction Defects in Roof May Close School

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency
    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

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    October 16, 2018 —
    In excess of 30 states have enacted tort reform legislation requiring property owners to notify construction professionals of the presence of alleged construction defects prior to the commencement of a lawsuit. These statutes also often permit construction professionals to make an offer of repair within a statutorily defined period of time after receipt of a notice of claim letter. Undoubtedly, the notice-of-claim process has played a meaningful part in bringing construction professionals and claimants to timely resolutions of construction defect concerns in isolated instances. However, while these statutes are commonly referred to as “right of repair” legislation, their practical effect is often reduced to little more than procedural empty gestures serving as a prelude to litigation. This article will briefly survey the “right to repair” statutes in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. In Nebraska, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming there is no right to repair or notice-of claim statue. Reprinted courtesy of Jean Meyer, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC and Sheri Roswell, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell LLC Mr. Bracken, may be contacted at meyer@hhmrlaw.com  Ms. Russo may be contacted at roswell@hhmrlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Will a Notice of Non-Responsibility Prevent Enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien?

    March 05, 2015 —
    The “Notice of Non-Responsibility” is one of the most misunderstood and ineffectively used of all the legal tools available to property owners in California construction law. As a result, in most cases the answer to the above question is “No”, the posting and recording of a Notice of Completion will not prevent enforcement of a California Mechanics Lien. The mechanics lien is a tool used by a claimant who has not been paid for performing work or supplying materials to a construction project. It provides the claimant the right to encumber the property where the work was performed and thereafter sell the property in order to obtain payment for the work or materials, even though the claimant had no contract directly with the property owner. When properly used, a Notice of Non-Responsibility will render a mechanics lien unenforceable against the property where the construction work was performed. By derailing the mechanics lien the owner protects his property from a mechanics lien foreclosure sale. Unfortunately, owners often misunderstand when they can and cannot effectively use a Notice of Non-Responsibility. As a result, the Notice of Non-Responsibility is usually ineffective in protecting the owner and his property. The rules for the use of the Notice of Non-Responsibility are found in California Civil Code section 8444. Deceptively simple, the rules essentially state that an owner “that did not contract for the work of improvement”, within 10 days after the owner first “has knowledge of the work of improvement”, may fill out the necessary legal form for a Notice of Non-Responsibility and post that form at the worksite and record it with the local County Recorder in order to prevent enforcement of a later mechanics lien on the property. What commonly occurs however is that early in the process the owner authorizes or even requires its tenant to perform beneficial tenant improvements on the property. This authorization is often set forth in a tenant lease or other written document. The dispositive factor for determining whether the Notice of Non-Responsibility will be enforceable though is that the owner knows that these improvements will be made to the property and intends that they be made, usually long before the work begins. Indeed, the owner has usually negotiated these very terms into the lease contract. The owner then mistakenly believes that once work on the property commences it has 10 days to post and record a Notice of Non-Responsibility and thereby protect itself from a mechanics lien. The usual error is two-fold. First, the statute states that the Notice is available when the owner “did not contract for the work of improvement”. The fact though is that the owner did contract for the work of improvement. It did so through the lease contract. This is true even though the owner’s contract was not with the contractor or supplier directly. Secondly, the 10 day period to post and record the Notice begins when the owner first “has knowledge” of the work of improvement. This knowledge was of course gained when the lease was negotiated and signed, providing knowledge typically many days before the work has begun. Thus, the 10 day period can also seldom be met. The Notice of Non-Responsibility will therefore fail both rules because the owner has in fact contracted for the improvement and because he does not act within 10 days of gaining this knowledge. The next event in the typical scenario occurs when the tenant does not pay its contractor. The contractor then has nothing to pay its subcontractors. Material suppliers also go unpaid. Mechanics liens are then recorded by the unpaid claimants, followed by foreclosure actions within ninety days thereafter. Owners will typically point to the Notice of Non-Responsibility they posted and recorded, claiming its protection. Claimants then in turn point to the lease or other evidence that the owner knew of the pending improvements and contracted in some way that the improvements be performed, often also more than 10 days before they posted the Notice. Judges generally agree with the unpaid mechanics lien claimants and the Notice of Non-Responsibility is deemed ineffective. The fact that the Court does not enforce the Notice of Non-Responsibility under these circumstances is not an unfair result. Since the owner authorized the work to be performed and it received a substantial benefit in the form of those improvements, it is not unfair that the owner should pay for those benefits. It would be inequitable for the owner to obtain the benefit of the improvements which it authorized but for which it did not pay, while allowing those who provided the benefit to go unpaid. Moreover, without such a system in place the door would be open to owners setting up sham “tenants” who would enter into contracts to have work performed, only to disappear when the work is completed, leaving the contractor without a source of payment. The system in place as described above prevents such duplicity. Owners would do well to arm themselves with proper knowledge of when the Notice of Non-Responsibility will and will not protect them and then responsibly use the Notice of Non-Responsibility. For the legal eagles among you, the following cases illustrate the view of the courts, consistent with the above: Baker v. Hubbard (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 226; Ott Hardware v. Yost (1945) 69 Cal. App.2d 593 (lease terms); Los Banos Gravel Co. v. Freeman (1976) 58 Cal.App.3d 785 (common interest); Howard S. Wright Construction Co. v. Superior Court (2003); 106 Cal.App.4th 314 (participating owner). William L. Porter of Porter Law Group, Inc. located in Sacramento, California may be contacted at (916) 381-7868 or bporter@porterlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    General Contractors: Consider Importance of "Primary Noncontributory" Language

    February 16, 2017 —
    In prior articles, I reinforced the importance of general contractors including “primary and noncontributory” language in subcontracts and requiring the subcontractor to provide an analogous “primary and noncontributory” endorsement. As a general contractor this is important, particularly since you are going to require the subcontractor to (i) indemnify you for claims relating to personal injury, property damage, or death, and (ii) identify you as an additional insured under its commercial general liability (CGL) policy for claims arising out of the subcontractor’s scope of work. The “primary and noncontributory” language in your subcontracts allows you to maximize the value of your additional insured status. 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

    Hong Kong Buyers Queue for New Homes After Prices Plunge

    July 09, 2014 —
    On a Saturday morning in mid-June, thousands wait, crammed into Hong Kong’s Fortune Metropolis mall, across Victoria Harbor from the main business district, their eyes locked on large elevated screens. Cheers erupt when numbers flash, indicating the lucky ticket holders in the crowd. They have paid HK$150,000 ($19,354) to enter a lottery that prioritizes buyers of apartments at City Point, a seven-tower development that billionaire Li Ka-shing’s Cheung Kong Holdings Ltd. (1) is building. More than 5,000 homebuyer-hopefuls are vying for 442 units, or about 11 for every home that went on sale the weekend of June 14. Housing sales in Hong Kong are rising after government efforts to cool soaring prices led transactions to plunge last year to the lowest since at least 2002. A drop in mortgage rates and discounts from builders are luring back buyers of new homes after their price fell as much as 20 percent since October. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Yun, Bloomberg
    Ms. Yun may be contacted at myun11@bloomberg.net

    Personal Thoughts on Construction Mediation

    September 20, 2021 —
    Construction Mediation WorksAs I left a mediation last week at 8:30 at night, I realized something that I knew all along. Mediation works. Why does mediation work? For several reasons that I can think of. The first, and likely most important is that lawyers are expensive. In most construction cases, we charge by the hour and those hours build up, especially close to a trial date. A mediated settlement can avoid this sharp uptick in attorney fees that always occurs in the last month before trial. Therefore the earlier the better. The second is the flexibility to make a business decision. Commercial contractors and subcontractors are in a business, and they should be making business decisions. While one such decision can be to go to litigation; litigation is not always the best solution from a financial, or stress perspective. Construction professionals, with the assistance of construction attorneys, can come up with a creative way to deal with a problem and solve it. 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

    Cyber Thieves Phish Away a $735K Payment to a Minnesota Contractor

    May 06, 2024 —
    The contractor's project manager asked for money due, $735,000 under Payment Application 13, to be sent by the owner electronically. "Hi Rick," the project manager, whose first name is Jalen, wrote in an email dated Aug. 15. "Can we have payments remitted electronically as we currently have numerous uncleared checks on hold?" Reprinted courtesy of Richard Korman, Engineering News-Record Mr. Korman may be contacted at kormanr@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Courthouse Reporter Series: Louisiana Supreme Court Holds Architect Has No Duty to Safeguard Third Parties Against Injury, Regardless of Knowledge of Dangerous Conditions on the Project

    July 31, 2024 —
    In Bonilla v. Verges Rome Architects, 2023-00928 (La. 3/22/24); 382 So.3d 62, the Louisiana Supreme Court held because the terms of the agreement between the architect and the public owner did not give the architect responsibility for the means and methods of construction or for safety on the project, the architect did not have a duty to safeguard third parties against injury, regardless of whether the architect may have had knowledge of dangerous conditions on the project. In Bonilla, the City of New Orleans entered into a contract for the renovation of a building owned by the city. The city also entered into an agreement with Verges Rome Architects (“VRA”) to serve as the project architect. The general contractor on the project subcontracted the demolition work to Meza Services, Inc. (“Meza”). An employee of Meza was injured while attempting to demolish a “vault” on the project. The vault was a ten-foot by ten-foot cinderblock room with a nine-foot-high concrete slab ceiling located on the second floor of the building. The walls of the vault had been partially demolished when one of the employees of Meza was directed by his supervisor to stand on the ceiling of the vault with a jackhammer to continue the demolition. Shortly after beginning the task, the vault structure collapsed and caused the employee to suffer significant injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stu Richeson, Phelps
    Mr. Richeson may be contacted at stuart.richeson@phelps.com

    A Funny Thing Happened to My Ground Lease in Bankruptcy Court

    November 25, 2024 —
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ground leases are an important – if somewhat unusual – part of the real estate finance industry. Because they typically cover large expensive properties like Rockefeller Center and The Empire State Building, to name two, and last a long time (99 years and up to start) the likelihood of something unexpected or unintended happening is high. This likelihood increases dramatically if, as highlighted below, one or both of the lease parties’ files for bankruptcy. Accordingly, real estate professionals should take note and take care when entering into any transaction involving a ground lease. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher F. Graham, White and Williams LLP and Morgan A. Goldstein, White and Williams LLP Mr. Graham may be contacted at grahamc@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Goldstein may be contacted at goldsteinm@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of