BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut hospital construction 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


    Florida High-Rise for Sale, Construction Defects Possibly Included

    In Pennsylvania, Contractors Can Be Liable to Third Parties for Obvious Defects in Completed Work

    New York Governor Expected to Sign Legislation Greatly Expanding Recoverable Damages in Wrongful Death Actions

    Don’t Waive Too Much In Your Mechanic’s Lien Waiver

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    Insurer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Earth Movement Exclusion Denied

    Jason Feld Awarded Volunteer of the Year by Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - Undocumented Change Work

    Insured Versus Insured Clause Does Not Bar Coverage

    Another Reminder to ALWAYS Show up for Court

    24th Annual West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar A Success

    Clearly Determining in Contract Who Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Hurry Up and Wait! Cal/OSHA Hits Pause on Emergency Temporary Standards for COVID-19 Prevention

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    Case Dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment Granted for BWB&O’s Client in Wrongful Death Case!

    Insurance Company Must Show that Lead Came from Building Materials

    Four Ways Student Debt Is Wreaking Havoc on Millennials

    Incorporate Sustainability in Building Design to Meet Green Construction Goals

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Can Baltimore Get a Great Bridge?

    CLB Recommends Extensive Hawaii Contractor License Changes

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    Home Prices on the Rise

    Texas Supreme Court Holds Anadarko’s $100M Deepwater Horizon Defense Costs Are Not Subject To Joint Venture Liability Limits

    Contractor’s Unwritten Contractual Claim Denied by Sovereign Immunity; Mandamus Does Not Help

    Golden Gate Bridge's $76 Million Suicide Nets Near Approval

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    Ruling Dealing with Constructive Changes, Constructive Suspension, and the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    July 1, 2015 Statutory Changes Affecting Virginia Contractors and Subcontractors

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    Disgruntled Online Reviews of Attorney by Disgruntled Former Client Ordered Removed from Yelp.com

    Red Tape Is Holding Up a Greener Future

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ranked on the 2017 "Best Law Firms" List by U.S. News - Best Lawyers

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

    Florida Governor Bans Foreign Citizens From Buying Land in Florida

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    City Wonders Who’s to Blame for Defective Wall

    Summary Judgment for Insurer on Construction Defect Claim Reversed

    Claim for Vandalism Loss Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Palo Alto Considers Fines for Stalled Construction Projects

    What Is the Best Way to Avoid Rezoning Disputes?

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Depreciation of Labor in Calculating Actual Cash Value Against Public Policy
    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

    A Few Green Building Notes

    April 03, 2019 —
    This past week, the blogosphere (if that’s even the word these days) has been abuzz about green building and the value that green can add to a project. Three items in particular (among many) got my attention. The first of these was the fact that a new private sustainability rating system is ready for launch. The Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (or ISI) is seeking public comment on its proposed envISIon. This new system (aptly dubbed Version 1.0) will go “live” in July for comment. Why mention this new system? First of all, ISI’s founding members are the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the American Public Works Association (APWA) and the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC). This trio gives the new program some fairly heavy weight backing. Second, while there are rating systems aside from the ever present LEED, none have taken hold in any real way to compete with LEED. I am curious to see if the envISIon system has any better luck. Finally, this shows that sustainable building is of interest to more than the USGBC and those of us that discuss LEED on a daily basis. I find this to be a great thing that could lead to more societal acceptance of sustainable practices as a standard practice rather than a goal. Hopefully such efforts will offset the other two notes that caught my eye recently. 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

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    June 15, 2020 —
    A California Court of Appeals opinion published earlier this month brings a change to payment bond claims brought by unpaid subcontractors and suppliers. The decision (Crosno Construction, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America) places limitations on a payment bond surety’s ability to rely on subcontract “pay-when-paid” language, stating that a payment provision typically found in subcontracts is contrary to the “reasonable time” statutory requirement and will not be enforced. This represents a major shift in California construction payment bond claim rights. Plaintiff Crosno Construction, Inc. (“Crosno) was a subcontractor to general contractor Clark Brothers (“Clark”), who was principal on a public works payment bond issued by Travelers. The owner was a public agency district (“District.”) Crosno had completed most of its subcontract work when a dispute between District and Clark arose, causing the project to stop. Crosno then sought payment through a payment bond claim against Travelers. Travelers denied the claim, relying on the subcontract’s payment provisions and asserting the defense that it had no obligation to pay on the bond claim because the litigation between Clark and the District had not yet reached its conclusion. Subcontract. The subcontract between Clark and Crosno contained a “pay-when-paid” provision stating that Clark would pay Crosno within a reasonable time after receiving payment from the District. In defining “a reasonable time,” the subcontract language provided that the time for payment “in no event shall be less than the time [Clark] and [Crosno] require to pursue to conclusion their legal remedies against [District] or other responsible party to obtain payment.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    Georgia Law: “An Occurrence Can Arise Where Faulty Workmanship Causes Unforeseen or Unexpected Damage to Other Property”

    March 05, 2011 —

    In American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Hathaway Development Co., Inc., No. S10G0521 (Ga. March 7, 2011), insured plumbing subcontractor Whisnant was sued by general contractor Hathaway seeking damages for costs incurred by Hathaway in repairing damage to property other than Whisnant’s plumbing work resulting from Whisnant’s negligently performed plumbing work on three separate projects. On one project, Whisnant installed a pipe smaller

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Is Still in Trouble, Two Major Reviews Say

    November 07, 2022 —
    Two separate assessments of the health of the Chesapeake Bay indicate that most jurisdictions within its watershed are not on track to meet target goals to cut nitrogen and phosphorus discharge levels by 2025. But new plans and programs put in place in 2022 could improve the restoration trajectory, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reprinted courtesy of Pam McFarland, Engineering News-Record Ms. McFarland may be contacted at mcfarlandp@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc.

    January 18, 2021 —
    In St. Mary & St. John Coptic Orthodox Church v. SBS Insurance Services, Inc., ----Cal.App.5th--- (November 23, 2020), the California First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's entry of judgment in favor of SBC Insurance Services ("SBC") regarding a claim for water damage sustained by a residence owned by St. Mary & John Coptic Church ("St. Mary") under property coverage afforded by a policy issued by Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company ("Philadelphia"). The policy was procured by SBC on behalf of St. Mary. Philadelphia denied coverage of the claim based on the vacancy exclusion in its policy, but entered into a settlement and loan receipt agreement, whereby St. Mary gave Philadelphia the right to control litigation in St. Mary’s name against SBC or third parties who might be liable for the loss in exchange for a loan of money to repair and remediate the damage sustained by the residence. The loan was to be repaid out of any recovery made against SBC or third parties. After a bench trial, the trial court found in favor of SBC and held that the vacancy exclusion was ambiguous. Essentially, the exclusion did not apply to the time period prior to the time St. Mary purchased the residence, such that the 60-day vacancy requirement could not be satisfied. The trial court reasoned that since St. Mary did not have an insurable interest in the property before it purchased the property, the 60-day requirement did not include the period before such residence was purchased and St. Mary held an insurable interest. The parties’ dispute arose of out of the Pope of the Coptic Church requesting St. Mary to purchase a home to be used as his papal residence in the Western United States. St. Mary also intended to use the home as a residence for visiting bishops. The home was purchased on May 28, 2015. As part of the purchase, SBC placed the home under St. Mary’s commercial policy, rather than purchasing a separate homeowner’s policy for the residence. Subsequently, the home sustained water damage due to a broken pipe. The water damage was discovered on July 24, 2015, 57 days after the inception of the Philadelphia policy and the loss. St. Mary tendered the property loss to Philadelphia, which denied coverage of the claim based on the reasoning that the home had been vacant for 60 consecutive days prior to the loss. Subsequently, St. Mary filed suit against SBC after securing the loan receipt agreement with Philadelphia based on the argument that the vacancy exclusion barred coverage of the claim and SBC breached its duty of care by not securing the proper coverage of the home. The trial court entered judgment in favor of SBC finding that the vacancy exclusion did not apply to bar coverage of the loss, such that SBC did not breach its duty of care owed to St. Mary as its broker. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Velladao, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Velladao may be contacted at Michael.Velladao@lewisbrisbois.com

    Construction Legislation Likely to Take Effect July 1, 2020

    April 27, 2020 —
    Coronavirus is dominating the news and planning for the effects of COVID-19 is a big deal for construction companies in the Commonwealth. However, these issues, though immediate, are not the only ones that have popped up here at the beginning of 2020. Several bills that I have been monitoring (here and here) have recently passed both the House of Delegates and the Virginia Senate and are on their way to the Governor for signature (a signature that is most likely going to happen in each case). Among those bills that did not pass are a bill that would have eliminated right to work in Virginia and allowed so called “closed shops” as well as fair share fees legislation that would have required those that were not part of a union to pay certain portions of union expenses. 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

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    August 26, 2015 —
    “‘We’re going to have to find another way to finance the upkeep of the roads,’ Gov. Jerry Brown said earlier this year in rolling out his 2015 budget. Governor Brown gave no specifics, but last fall he signed a law that set up a commission to study a ‘road usage charge’ with a call to ‘establish a pilot program by Jan. 1, 2017…'” – San Jose Mercury News, January 27, 2015 This Change, It’s a Coming (Maybe) Many states and the federal government are seriously considering converting from a “gallons consumed” tax levy to a “miles driven” program for determining gasoline tax. There are several compelling reasons for such a change. First, our roads are falling apart while revenue from current highway taxes fall woefully short of our current and projected needs. In the meantime, the number of miles driven by all-electric cars that pay no gas tax, is increasing rapidly; and by hybrids that pay substantially reduced tax; and worse for the taxing authorities, by increasingly efficient gas-powered cars. All of this means rapidly dropping gas tax revenues. Seeing this trend, local, state and the federal governments are making a major push to convert from a consumption based tax to a “miles driven” tax. This a good thing for those of us that believe increased investment in our transportation infrastructure is of high national concern. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Roger Hughes, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Hughes may be contacted at rhughes@wendel.com

    Wisconsin Court of Appeals Re-affirms American Girl To Find Coverage for Damage Caused by Subcontractors

    September 20, 2021 —
    The trial court's finding of no occurrence and no property damage due to faulty workmanship was reversed by the appellate court. No. 5 Walworth v. Engerman Contracting, Inc., 2021 Wis. App. LEXIS 401 (Wis. Ct. App, July 30, 2021). Engerman was the general contractor on a construction project at a residence. Engerman was hired to build a poll complex. Engerman subcontracted the project to Downes Swimming Pool Co., Inc. Downes purchased shotcrete (sprayed concrete) from Otto Jacobs Company LLC for the swimming poll walls and base. After completion, the pool immediately began leaking. An investigation determined that the shotcrete material was not installed correctly, contributing to cracking in the pool walls and the steel reinforcing bars were not sufficient to prevent cracks in the pool walls. The owner demolished the pool and constructed a new one. Thereafter, the owner sued Engerman, its insurers (General Casualty Company of Wisconsin and West Bend Mutual Insurance Company) and Downes and its insurer. Downes filed a third-party complaint against Jacobs and its insurer (Acuity Mutual Insurance Company) alleging Jacobs negligently provided inferior shotcrete to Downes. 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