BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut reconstruction 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


    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Subrogation Waiver Unconscionable in Residential Fuel Delivery Contract

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    One Sector Is Building Strength Amid Slow Growth

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    Be a Good Neighbor: Techniques to Mitigate the Risk of Claims from Adjacent Landowners

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    Missouri Legislature Passes Bill to Drastically Change Missouri’s “Consent Judgment” Statute

    Beware of Statutory Limits on Change Orders

    A Look at Trending Legislative Changes Impacting Workers' Comp

    Chicago Makes First Major Update to City's Building Code in 70 Years

    Earth Movement Exclusion Precludes Coverage

    Uniwest Rides Again (or, Are Architects Subject to Va. Code Section 11-4.1?)

    Wall Failure Due to Construction Defect Says Insurer

    AB 1701 – General Contractor Liability for Subcontractors’ Unpaid Wages

    A Murder in Honduras Reveals the Dark Side of Clean Energy

    Tenth Circuit Finds Appraisal Can Decide Causation of Loss Under Colorado Law

    The (Jurisdictional) Rebranding of The CDA’s Sum Certain Requirement

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    Ignoring Employee ADA Accommodation Requests Can Be Costly – A Cautionary Tale

    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

    BIOHM Seeks to Turn Plastic Waste into Insulation Material with Mushrooms

    Economist Predicts Housing Starts to Rise in 2014

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    TxDOT: Flatiron/Dragados Faces Default Over Bridge Design Issues

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Andrea DeField and Cary D. Steklof, Recognized as Legal Elite

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Too Soon?”

    Automated Weather Insurance Could Offer Help in an Increasingly Hot World

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    The Dangers of an Unlicensed Contractor from Every Angle

    Certificates of Merit: Is Your Texas Certificate Sufficient?

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Pennsylvania: When Should Pennsylvania’s New Strict Products Liability Law Apply?

    ADP Says Payrolls at Companies in U.S. Increase 200,000

    When Can a General Contractor’s Knowledge be Imputed to a Developer?

    Does the Miller Act Trump Subcontract Dispute Provisions?

    Singapore Unveils Changes to Make Public Housing More Affordable

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies

    EPA Issues Interpretive Statement on Application of NPDES Permit System to Releases of Pollutants to Groundwater

    Canadian Developer Faces Charges After Massive Fire on Construction Site

    Tension Over Municipal Gas Bans Creates Uncertainty for Real Estate Developers

    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    Delaware River Interstate Bridge Shut to Assess Truss Fracture
    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

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    May 10, 2013 —
    Builders are hiring again, or at least they’re trying to. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, many of the workers who were laid off during the construction bust have gone on to work in other areas. John Nunan of Unger Construction told the Times that “we’re starting to see spot shortages of labor.” One problem is that despite the boom, wages haven’t risen. Rising costs for materials and land have put an additional squeeze on builders. One building supervisor noted that during the boom, he was making $26 an hour and entry level workers $17. Now he earns $16 an hour. From bust to recovery was about five years, and its labor pool could not just wait those years. Industry representatives told the Times that it has created a perception that construction is not a stable form of employment. Brian Turmail of the Associated General Contractors of America cited “pretty consistent news coverage about the fact that there are no jobs in construction.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Two Texas Cities Top San Francisco for Property Investors

    October 22, 2014 —
    Houston and Austin are the most attractive U.S. markets for buying and developing real estate, topping San Francisco, as growth potential in the Texas cities draws investors from popular coastal areas, a survey shows. The Northern California city ranked third, down from No. 1 last year, according to a report released today by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and the Urban Land Institute. Denver and Dallas-Fort Worth rounded out the five markets offering the best prospects for investors in 2015, the poll of more than 1,400 people in the real estate business shows. Manhattan slipped out of the top 10 to rank 14th. Some non-coastal markets are drawing more property investors partly because they offer higher yields than places such as San Francisco and Manhattan, which led the recovery from the financial crisis. The smaller cities also are benefiting from employment growth and increasing numbers of people moving into urban centers, according to Mitch Roschelle, a partner and U.S. real estate advisory practice leader at PricewaterhouseCoopers in New York. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Louis, Bloomberg
    Mr. Louis may be contacted at blouis1@bloomberg.net

    Crossrail Audit Blames Busted Budget and Schedule on Mismanagement

    August 13, 2019 —
    In a new report on London’s Crossrail, the U.K. National Audit Office says the beleaguered transportation project is around two years late and nearly 20% over budget because of poor management. The NAO, charged by Parliament with monitoring public spending, pointed to ill-conceived “aspirational” plans that proved to be unfit for the technologically challenging and vast program when things went wrong. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peter Reina, ENR

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    August 19, 2015 —
    The California Court of Appeal offered a primer in the appraisal process in reversing the trial court's confirmation of the appraisal award. Lee v. California Capital Ins. Co., 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 530 (Cal. Ct. App. June 18, 2015). A fire damaged an apartment building owned by the insured. The fire started in unit 3 on the ground floor. The insurer argued the fire did not extend beyond unit 3. The insured claimed that the fire damaged six of the 12 apartments with fire or smoke. The insured's public adjuster submitted a claim to the insurer that exceeded $800,000. The statement of loss included costs for cleaning, asbestos abatement, reconstruction of affected apartments, and loss of rent. The public adjuster said the loss consisted of burn damage to unit 3 and some damage to the "common" walls located between the apartments on the two floors above unit 3. All of the interior rooms of five apartments other than unit 3 would need to be completely dismantled and then replaced. 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

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    March 05, 2015 —
    “Affordable housing” is the latest catchphrase for Colorado homebuilders seeking immunity from warranty claims and repair requests. In 2013, the homebuilders’ lobby said it was about public transportation. In 2014 they said it was about community building. Now it’s 2015, and the lobbyists are claiming that a lack of affordable housing is the reason why politicians should eliminate consumer protections for homebuyers. The Colorado Senate recently announced the introduction of SB 15-177. If passed, the bill will make it illegal for homeowner associations to hire construction experts or lawyers unless they can first satisfy a complicated disclosure and voting process. Although sponsors portray the bill as an innocuous measure that merely requires more community involvement, its provisions have actually been tailored to take advantage of recent court decisions that make it difficult for homeowner associations to vote on measures outside of a meeting or act quickly to resolve construction defect disputes. The intent is to make it nearly impossible for homeowners to retain construction experts or legal representation before the statute of limitations period expires, thereby making homebuilders immune from any potential claims. The bill will also eliminate the right to a jury trial in many cases, forcing any disputes that overcome the procedural hurdles into costly, private arbitration proceedings. The sponsors argue that these measures are necessary to encourage builders to erect more cheap condominiums. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, The Witt Law Firm
    Mr. Witt welcomes comments at www.acerbicwitt.com

    MGM Seeks to Demolish Harmon Towers

    September 01, 2011 —

    Citing public safety concerns and the cost of repair, MGM Resorts International is seeking to demolish the unfinished hotel tower. The company has a few hurdles to go through before they start laying the charges to implode the structure. Any plans would have to be approved by not only Clark County officials, but also the district court has an order blocking any activity during litigation between MGM and the general contractor on the project, Perini Building Company.

    Architectural Record reports that MGM states it would take “approximately 18 months to conduct test and come up with an approved, permitted design to fix the Harmon.” MGM feels that repairs would then take another two to three years. Perini contends that they could “provide stamped drawings detailing all necessary repairs within three months.” They attribute MGM’s desire to demolish the building as “buyer’s remorse.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds That Insurer Must Defend Oil Company Against Entire Lawsuit

    October 07, 2019 —
    The Georgia Court of Appeals recently affirmed a grant of summary judgment in favor of Mountain Express Oil Company on its breach of contract claim against liability insurer, Southern Trust Insurance Company. Empire Petroleum brought claims against Mountain Express for breach of contract, injunctive relief, and libel or slander, among others. Mountain Express sought a defense to that lawsuit under its insurance policy with Southern Trust. Southern Trust contended that the insurance policy did not cover Empire’s non-libel/slander claims, and therefore reimbursed Mountain Express for only a portion of its attorneys’ fees. After the Empire lawsuit settled, Mountain Express sued Southern Trust for breach of contract and bad faith for failing to pay the remaining defense costs, contending that Southern Trust had a duty to defend the entire lawsuit. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Mountain Express on its breach of contract claim. Citing policy language stating that “[the insurer] will have the right and duty to defend the insured against any ‘suit’ seeking those damages,” the court held that Southern Trust was obligated to defend the entire lawsuit. Specifically, in reaching that conclusion, the court noted that by agreeing to defend any “suit,” not any “claim,” Southern Trust obligated itself to defend the entire lawsuit if any claim could be covered under the policy. Accordingly, Southern Trust breached the policy when it only agreed to defend some of the claims against its insured. Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Alexander D. Russo, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    January 13, 2017 —
    Recently, the Federal District Court for the District of Delaware imposed $3 million in punitive sanctions in order to redress harms caused by a company’s bad faith deletion of tens of thousands of emails during the course of litigation. The sanctions were ordered pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, which was amended effective December 1, 2015 to permit sanctions for the failure to preserve electronically stored information (“ESI”). In GN Netcom, Inc. v. Plantronics, Inc.,1 the plaintiff, GN Netcom, brought an antitrust suit alleging that the defendant company, Plantronics, interfered with distributors to stop GN Netcom from marketing its product. Upon receipt of GN Netcom’s demand letter, Plantronics issued a litigation hold and began providing training sessions to its employees to ensure compliance. Upon filing of GN Netcom’s suit, Plantronics issued an updated litigation hold and continued training sessions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Grace V. Hebbel, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Hebbel may be contacted at gvh@sdvlaw.com