BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness consultantFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs 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


    “Families First Coronavirus Response Act”: Emergency Paid Leave for Construction Employers with Fewer Than 500 Employees

    Funding the Self-Insured Retention (SIR)

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    County Elects Not to Sue Over Construction Defect Claims

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    Avoiding Wage Claims in California Construction

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    Make Prudent Decisions regarding your Hurricane Irma Property Damage Claims

    BUILD Act Inching Closer To Reality

    Former Trump Atlantic City Casino Set for February Implosion

    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Immigrants' Legal Status Eyed Over Roles in New York Fake Injury Lawsuits

    Let’s Get Surety Podcast – #126 Building the Future: AI, Construction and Law

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Communicate with the Field to Nip Issues in the Bud

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    A Recap of the Supreme Court’s 2019 Summer Slate

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design

    Contractor Suffolk's Hospital Project Is on Critical List After Steward Health Care Bankruptcy

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    Mandatory Attorneys’ Fee Award for Actions Brought Under the Underground Utility Damage Prevention Act

    Insurer Must Defend Construction Defect Claims

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    Unlocking the Hidden Power of Zoning, for Good or Bad

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    No Friday Night Lights at $60 Million Texas Stadium: Muni Credit

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    Force Majeure Recommendations

    Supreme Court of Washington State Upholds SFAA Position on Spearin Doctrine

    Application of Set-Off When Determining Prevailing Party for Purposes of Attorney’s Fees

    Newmeyer & Dillion Selected to 2017 OCBJ’s Best Places to Work List

    "On Second Thought"

    New York Appellate Court Expands Policyholders’ Ability to Plead and Seek Consequential Damages

    Court of Appeals Finds Additional Insured Coverage Despite “Care, Custody or Control” Exclusion

    Construction Cybercrime Is On the Rise

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    A DC Office Building Offers a Lesson in Glass and Sculpture

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    CRH to Buy Building-Products Firm Laurence for $1.3 Billion

    Two Architecturally Prized Buildings May be Demolished

    The Enforceability of “Pay-If-Paid” Provisions Affirmed in New Jersey

    Court Holds That Property Insurance Does Not Cover Economic Loss From Purchasing Counterfeit Vintage Wine

    Janeen Thomas Installed as State Director of WWBA, Receives First Ever President’s Award
    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. Leveraging 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

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    February 15, 2018 —

    Contractors: do yourself a favor and consult your insurance broker regarding your commercial general liability (CGL) policy. Do this now, especially if you subcontract out work.

    CGL policies contain a “your work” exclusion. The CGL policy is written such that it excludes “‘property damage’ to ‘your work’ arising out of it or any part of it and included in the ‘products-completed operations hazard.’” This exclusion will be raised in the post-completion latent construction defect scenario. (There are other exclusions that will be raised to a defect discovered during construction.) Certain policies will contain a subcontractor exception to this “your work” exclusion. You WANT this exception- no doubt about it so that this exclusion does not apply to work performed by your subcontractors. Without this subcontractor exception, truth be told, this “your work” exclusion is a total back-breaker to contractors. It will give your insurer an immediate out for many latent defect property scenarios since excluded from coverage is property damage to your work including work performed by your subcontractors.

    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

    Court Denies Insurers' Motions for Summary Judgment Under All Risk Policies

    June 05, 2017 —
    The federal district court found that the insurers could not escape coverage by summary judgment under their all risk policies. Eagle Harbour Condo Assoc'n v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54761 (W.D. Wash. April 10, 2017). Eagle Harbour Condominium Association sued several of its insurers who denied coverage for hidden water damage. Various insurers provided coverage from 1988 to 2015. The Association asserted that wind-driven rain and inadequate construction allowed water to penetrate the buildings' sheathing and framing, causing decades of deterioration and decay, until the damage was exposed to view in August 2014. The insurers claimed that the loss resulted from poor decisions in constructing and inadequately maintaining a stucco building in the wet and windy Pacific Northwest. The Association argued that the policies did not explicitly exclude damage caused by wind-driven rain, so there was coverage. 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

    Repeated Use of Defective Fireplace Triggers Duty to Defend Even if Active Fire Does Not Break Out Until After End of Policy Period

    November 30, 2016 —
    In Tidwell Enterprises v. Financial Pacific Ins. Co. (No. C078665, filed 11/29/16), a California appeals court held that that even though a house fire occurred after the policy period, there was nonetheless a possibility of coverage because the fire might have been the result of ongoing damage to the wood in the chimney chase during the policy period, due to the exposure of that wood to excessive heat from the chimney every time a fire was burned in the fireplace. 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

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    December 31, 2014 —
    Did you think that a subcontractor had to name a general contractor in a mechanic’s lien suit? I did. Did you think that nothing about this changed in the case where a Virginia mechanic’s lien was “bonded off” pursuant to Va. Code Section 43-71? I did. Well, a recent Virginia Supreme Court case, Synchronized Construction Services Inc. v. Prav Lodging LLC, seems to at least create some doubt as to whether the a general contractor is a “necessary” party to a lawsuit by a subcontractor in the case where a bond is posted for release of a mechanic’s lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    The Real Estate Crisis in North Dakota's Man Camps

    October 02, 2015 —
    Chain saws and staple guns echo across a $40 million residential complex under construction in Williston, North Dakota, a few miles from almost-empty camps once filled with oil workers. After struggling to house thousands of migrant roughnecks during the boom, the state faces a new real-estate crisis: The frenzied drilling that made it No. 1 in personal-income growth and job creation for five consecutive years hasn’t lasted long enough to support the oil-fueled building explosion. Civic leaders and developers say many new units were already in the pipeline, and they anticipate another influx of workers when oil prices rise again. But for now, hundreds of dwellings approved during the heady days are rising, skeletons of wood and cement surrounded by rolling grasslands, with too few residents who can afford them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Oldham, Bloomberg

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    December 30, 2013 —
    The trial court's holding that there was no occurrence based on claims from faulty workmanship was reversed by the appellate division of the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The underlying claims were based on product liability tort claims, not faulty workmanship. Indalex Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA., 2013 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3186 (Pa. Superior Court Dec. 3, 2013). The underlying lawsuits claimed that the insureds' windows and doors were defectively designed or manufactured, which resulted in water leakage causing physical damage, such as mold and cracked walls. There were also personal injury claims. The insureds had a primary policy with OneBeacon Insurance Group, but the policy limits were exhausted. The insureds turned to their commercial umbrella policy issued by National Union. The policy defined occurrence as "an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to conditions, which results in Bodily Injury or Property Damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the Insured." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    February 18, 2015 —
    A recent article in the Construction Executive discussed the importance of preserving your claim, both in terms of timeliness of submitting your claim and making sure that you aren’t waiving portions of your claim when executing releases. These are all excellent points and bear some follow-up. Timing Your Claim I often review construction contracts that contain deadlines by which claims must be submitted. It may seem counter intuitive to think that you need to submit a claim when you are discussing the basis for the claim with an upstream contractor or the owner. But, there are more cases than I care to count where a contractor’s claim has been denied because the claim was not timely submitted. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    California Case Is a Reminder That Not All Insurance Policies Are Alike Regarding COVID-19 Losses

    April 05, 2021 —
    A recent case from the Central District of California reminds us that not all insurance policies are alike. Depending on the particular policy, losses from the COVID-19 outbreak could qualify as property damage and therefore could be recoverable under an all-risk insurance policy. COVID-19 has in many cases imposed significant costs on contractors, and in a host of ways. Contractors’ attempts to recover these costs from owners or insurers have at times been frustrated by contractual or policy language written after a lengthy time, during which the risk of a pandemic on the scale of COVID-19 was not as much of a concern as it is now. This has led contractors to explore new, often creative legal theories in their attempts to recover costs flowing from COVID-19. A recent Complaint filed in the Central District of California focuses on all-risk property insurance policies and the potential for contractors who have purchased such policies to classify contamination from COVID-19 as an insurable property loss. In AECOM v. Zurich Insurance Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-00237-JAK-MRW (C.D. Cal), a contractor purchased “all-risk” property insurance from Zurich. This policy covered “economic losses from all risks not expressly excluded.” According to the Complaint, the presence of COVID-19 on its properties “physically alter[ed] air, airspace, and surfaces preventing… (the contractor) from using its properties for their intended purpose and function.” Reprinted courtesy of Neal I. Sklar, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Joshua A. Morehouse, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Sklar may be contacted at nsklar@pecklaw.com Mr. Morehouse may be contacted at jmorehouse@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of