BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting engineersFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architectural 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


    Before Celebrating the Market Rebound, Builders Need to Read the Fine Print: New Changes in Construction Law Coming Out of the Recession

    Mandatory Arbitration Isn’t All Bad, if. . .

    Contract Void Ab Initio: Key Insights into the KBR vs. Corps of Engineers Affirmative Defense

    Punchlist: The News We Didn’t Quite Get To – May 2016

    Colorado Statutes of Limitations and Repose, A First Step in Construction Defect Litigation

    BE PROACTIVE: Steps to Preserve and Enhance Your Insurance Rights In Light of the Recent Natural Disasters

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    No Bad Faith in Insurer's Denial of Collapse Claim

    Be Mindful Accepting Payment When Amounts Owed Are In Dispute

    Hunton Insurance Partner, Larry Bracken, Elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Federal Judge Vacates CDC Eviction Moratorium Nationwide

    Instant Hotel Tower, But Is It Safe?

    Engineering, Architecture, and Modern Technology – An Interview with Dr. Jakob Strømann-Andersen

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Withdrawal of an Admission in California May Shift Costs—Including Attorneys’ Fees—Incurred in Connection with the Withdrawal

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    The Ghosts of Tariffs Past May Help Us in the Future

    ConsensusDOCS Hits the Cloud

    Edinburg School Inspections Uncovered Structural Construction Defects

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    Three-Year Delay Not “Prompt Notice,” But Insurer Not “Appreciably Prejudiced” Either, New Jersey Court Holds

    Insurer Prevails on Summary Judgment for Bad Faith Claim

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Three Kahana Feld Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    New Jersey Imposes New Apprenticeship Training Requirements

    Pay Inequities Are a Symptom of Broader Gender Biases, Studies Show

    Construction Laborers Sue Contractors Over Wage Theft

    Illinois Insureds are Contesting One Carrier's Universal Denial to Covid-19 Losses

    Hunton Insurance Partner Syed Ahmad Named to Benchmark Litigation’s 2019 40 & Under Hot List

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

    The Pitfalls of Oral Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Call Me Maybe? . . . Don’t Waive Your Rights Under the Right to Repair Act’s Prelitigation Procedures

    Expanded Virginia Court of Appeals Leads to Policyholder Relief

    Bremer Whyte Congratulates Nicole Nuzzo on OCBA Professionalism and Ethics Committee Appointment

    Second Circuit Clarifies What Must Be Alleged to Establish “Joint Employer” Liability in the Context of Federal Employment Discrimination Claims

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    #8 CDJ Topic: The Las Vegas HOA Fraud Case Concludes but Controversy Continues

    Newmeyer & Dillion Named for Top-Tier Practice Areas in 2018 U.S. News – Best Law Firms List

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Eye on Housing Examines Costs of Green Features

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    Forcible Entry and Detainer Actions: Courts May Not Consider Tenant’s Hardship

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses
    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

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?

    May 30, 2022 —
    Many courts enforce forum selection clauses in contracts between parties. In W. Bay Plaza Condo. Ass’n v. Sika Corp., No. 3D21-1834, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1637 (W. Bay Plaza), the Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District (Court of Appeal) answered the question of whether a mandatory forum selection clause in a manufacturer’s warranty was enforceable as to a condominium association, who was a non-signatory. The trial court enforced the forum selection clause – calling for litigation in New Jersey rather than Florida – and the Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling. As stated in W. Bay Plaza, in late 2013 and early 2014, West Bay Plaza Condominium Association (W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n) contracted with Built Right Installers International Corporation, R.J. Miranda Consultants, Inc. and UCI Engineering Inc. (collectively, the Construction Defendants) to have repairs done to the exterior of the property. In 2016, Sika Corporation (Sika), a New Jersey corporation, gave a five-year warranty to W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n for three sealant products used to repair the garage at the property. In 2019, W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n sued the Construction Defendants for breach of contract and professional negligence. Subsequently, W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n amended its complaint and filed a claim against Sika, alleging that Sika breached its warranty because its products failed to provide a watertight barrier. Sika filed a motion to dismiss the action, alleging that Florida was an improper venue because its’ warranty contained a mandatory forum selection clause. W.B. Plaza Condo. Ass’n argued that it was not bound by the forum selection clause because it was a non-signatory to the warranty and, even if it was bound by the clause, there were compelling reasons not to enforce it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    New Jersey Judge Found Mortgage Lender Liable When Borrower Couldn’t Pay

    August 06, 2014 —
    According to the New Jersey Law Journal, Freedom Mortgage Corporation has to pay treble damages and legal fees after Bergen County Superior Court Judge Gerald Escala found the company “liable under New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act for providing a home refinance loan to a 70-year-old borrower it should have known would be unable to make the payments.” “Escala further ruled that Freedom Mortgage must hold off on obtaining a foreclosure judgment for a year to allow an opportunity for borrower Mamie Major to look for someone to buy the property or to obtain refinancing elsewhere,” the New Jersey Law Journal reported. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Strangers in a Strange Land: Revisiting Arbitration Provisions to Account for Increasing International Influences

    July 16, 2023 —
    Arbitration is nothing new. Neither is globalization. But the two are coming together in ways that have incrementally influenced the manner in which many arbitrations are now conducted. And this merits a re-examination of old arbitration clauses to account for some of these new influences. With that in mind, this article will examine some basic considerations when examining arbitration agreements within a construction industry that continues to see the increasing participation of foreign companies in domestic projects. Although this is not a comprehensive review of best drafting practices, nor is it a full survey of the differences between domestic and international arbitration, this article will nonetheless highlight a few basic concepts to keep in mind when reviewing arbitration clauses. As a basic starting point, the continuing globalization of the construction industry has led to distinct impacts on the ways in which parties conduct arbitrations in the United States. The increased participation of international companies in domestic construction projects has naturally led to the application of international legal concepts to domestic alternative dispute resolution. And the increasing prevalence of these international concepts has led to a number of important trends that can impact the way arbitrations are handled. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William Underwood, Jones & Walker (ConsensusDocs)
    Mr. Underwood may be contacted at wunderwood@joneswalker.com

    Netherlands’ Developer Presents Modular Homes for Young Professionals

    March 05, 2015 —
    Builder Magazine reported that Heijmans, a development and building company based in The Netherlands, believes their new modular home, the Heijmans ONE, is a solution for young professionals looking for an affordable, urban option. “As a designer, I believe prefabricated architecture can beautifully balance quality, experience and economic feasibility,” the project's architect Tim van der Grinten, of Moodbuilders Architecture, told Builder Magazine. “The architecture of this compact house is characterized by natural materials, space, openness and identity. It is a clearly recognizable property that you can make your own.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Retrospective As-Built Schedule Analysis Can Be Used to Support Delay

    May 23, 2022 —
    Delay claims are part of construction. There should be no surprise why. Time is money. A delay claim should be accompanied by expert opinions that bolster evidence that gets introduced. The party against whom the delay claim is made will also have an expert – a rebuttal expert. Not surprisingly, each of the experts will rely on a different critical path as to relates to the same project. The party claiming delay will rely on a critical path that shows the actions of the other party impacted their critical path and proximately caused the delay. This will be refuted by the opposing expert that will challenge the critical path and the actions claimed had no impact on the critical path (i.e., did not proximately cause the delay). Quintessential finger pointing! This was the situation in CTA I, LLC v. Department of Veteran Affairs, CBCA 5826, 2022 WL 884710 (CBCA 2022), where the government terminated the contractor for convenience and the contractor claimed equitable adjustments for, among other things, delay. The contractor’s expert relied on an as-built critical path analysis by “retrospectively creating updates to insert between the contemporaneous updates.” Id., supra, n.3. The government’s expert did not do a retrospective as-built analysis and relied on only contemporaneous schedule updates. Id. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Issues Were Not Covered in Construction Defect Suit

    December 09, 2011 —

    The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Peters v. Marque Homes. In this case, Walter Peters provided the land and funding for Marque Homes to build a luxury residence in Glendale, Arizona. By the terms of the “Joint Venture Agreement,” Peters provided the land and funding, while Marque would not charge Peters for overhead, profits, or supervision fees. The agreement specified that profits would be divided equally.

    Two years later, Marque sued Peters claiming he had breached his obligations by refusing several offers for the home. Peters replied that Marque had “failed to complete the home so it is habitable to prospective purchasers.” Peters stated he had “retained an expert inspector who had identified numerous defects.” The court appointed a Special Commissioner to list the home for sale. Peters purchased the home with two stipulations ordered by the court. At this point, the earlier case was dismissed with prejudice.

    Peters then sued Marque “asserting express and implied warranty claims arising out of alleged construction defects in the home.” Marque claimed that Peters’s claims were “precluded by the prior joint venture dispute.” The court granted Marque’s motion.

    The appeals court reversed the lower court’s decision, determining that Peters’s claims were not precluded by the agreement. Although there had been a prior case between the two parties, warranty issues did not form a part of that case. “Peters never raised these allegations nor presented this evidence in support of any warranty claim.”

    The court also noted that the “parties never agreed to preclude future warranty claims.” Marque and Peters “agreed in the stipulated sale order that ‘the sale of the property to a third party shall be “as is” with a 10-year structural warranty.’” The court noted that the agreement said nothing about one of the parties buying the house.

    The appeals court left open a claim by Marque that there are no implied or express warranties available to Peters. They asked the Superior Court to address this.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Connecticut Court Finds Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Enforceable

    March 19, 2015 —
    Canvassing both case law and scholarly authority, the court determined that the anti-concurrent cause (ACC) provision barred coverage for loss caused by Tropical Storm Irene. Lombardi v. Universal N. Am Ins. Co., 2015 Conn. Super. LEXIS 138 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 21, 2015). Tropical Storm Irene caused the insured's home to shift and move from its concrete pier foundation. The house later had to be demolished. The insurer's expert concluded that the house was removed from the foundation by storm surge and not by wind. The damage caused by wind was limited to 24 feet of trim missing from the roof and about 70 square feet of shingles that were blown away. The insured's expert concluded the house was removed from its foundation due to a combination of wind and water forces. The insured's expert reported that "the water wave action most probably caused most damage to the dwelling support pilings, with wind conditions contributing to the wave action." 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

    Subcontractor Strength Will Drive Industry’s Ability to Meet Demand, Overcome Challenges

    October 10, 2022 —
    Owners, developers and general contractors get a lot of notoriety for construction projects, especially in these infrastructure-focused times. However, the subcontractor is truly the one under the microscope, as this group requires the most care and attention to ensure the owners and operators are able to meet accelerating demand and public expectations. The challenges in the current environment are many. Inflation and supply chain disruptions are highly detrimental to specialty trades in the mechanical, electrical, plumbing, drywall and other areas. Reports show that the construction industry, in particular, has seen an increase of over 20% in the cost of supplies and building materials in the last year alone and, in some cases, over 90% since the start of the pandemic. While these costs are passed along to the owner, the subcontractor still retains significant cash flow risk. This truth is amplified in a volatile market. As if the cost was not enough, equipment and material shortages coupled with rising interest rates only compound the problem—and tenfold for small businesses. Subcontractors are likely to feel the greatest pressure from supply-related issues. Inflation combined with supply chain shortages require subcontractors to prepare earlier for projects and, when possible, purchase materials upfront. However, the consequence of this preliminary preparation equates to further strains on cash flow. In an effort to remain aligned on schedules and budgets, subcontractors frequently buy all of a project’s materials as soon as a contract is signed—if not before. Reprinted courtesy of Anwar Ghauche, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of