BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    Tips for Contractors Who Want to Help Rebuild After the California Wildfires

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Oregon Courthouse Reopening after Four Years Repairing Defects

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    Insurer Motion to Intervene in Underlying Case Denied

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    Federal Court Rejects Insurer's Argument that Wisconsin Has Adopted the Manifestation Trigger for Property Policy

    Stay of Coverage Case Appropriate While Court Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    The Future of Pandemic Coverage for Real Estate Owners and Developers

    Georgia House Bill Addresses Construction Statute of Repose

    Just Because You Caused it, Doesn’t Mean You Own It: The Hooker Exception to the Privette Doctrine

    Recommendations for Property Owners After A Hurricane: Submit a Claim

    Kahana Feld Welcomes Six Attorneys to the Firm in Q4 of 2023

    Bright-Line Changes: Prompt Payment Act Trends

    How To Fix Oroville Dam

    The California Legislature Passes SB 496 Limiting Design Professional Defense and Indemnity Obligations

    Mitigating FCRA Risk Through Insurance

    Indiana Court of Appeals Rules Against Contractor and Performance Bond Surety on Contractor's Differing Site Conditions Claim

    The U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on Greystone

    What the FIU Bridge Collapse Says About Peer Review

    COVID-19 Business Closure and Continuity Compliance Resource

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    NLRB Hits Unions with One-Two Punch the Week Before Labor Day

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Condominium Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defect

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    Equities Favor Subrogating Insurer Over Subcontractor That Performed Defective Work

    It's a Wrap! Enforcing Online Agreements in Light of the CPRA

    Board of Directors Guidance When Addressing Emergency Circumstances Occasioned by the COVID-19 Pandemic

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Increase at Slower Pace

    Maria Latest Threat to Puerto Rico After $1 Billion Irma Hit

    Philadelphia Voters to Consider Best Value Bid Procurment

    Designers Face Fatal Pedestrian Bridge Collapse Fallout

    Florida “get to” costs do not constitute damages because of “property damage”

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    U.S. District Court of Colorado Interprets Insurance Policy’s Faulty Workmanship Exclusion and Exception for Ensuing Damage

    ENR 2024 Water Report: Managers Look to Potable Water Reuse

    Harmon Tower Demolition on Hold Due to Insurer

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    UK's Biggest Construction Show Bans 'Promo Girls'

    Multisensory Marvel: Exploring the Innovative MSG Sphere

    Untangling Unique Legal Issues in Modern Modular Construction
    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

    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable?

    December 29, 2020 —
    If I Released My California Mechanics Lien, Can I File a New Mechanics Lien on the Same Project? Will the New Mechanics Lien be Enforceable? In general, the answer to the above questions is “Yes”, but only if you meet the following requirements:
    1. You must only release the mechanics lien itself, but not the “right” to a mechanics lien: There is an important distinction to be made between releasing a mechanics lien and releasing the right to a mechanics lien. Whether you do one or the other will depend on the specific language used in your release. In the case of Santa Clara Land Title Co. v. Nowack and Associates, Inc. (1991) 226 Cal. App.3d, 1558 a “release of mechanics lien” document was recorded TO THE County Recorder’s office which included a statement that the mechanics lien was “fully satisfied, released and discharged”. Based on this language, the court concluded that the mechanics lien claimant had waived its “right” to a further mechanics lien on the same property for the work in question. The court concluded that since the release stated that the claim was “fully satisfied” the right to mechanics lien on the project had forever been waived. The Nowak case can be distinguished from the case of Koudmani v. Ogle Enterprises, Inc., (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 1650, where the release of mechanics lien only stated that the mechanics lien was “otherwise released and discharged” and not that it was “satisfied”. Based on the distinction drawn from the two cases, a simple mechanics lien release that only releases the mechanics lien itself, but not the “right” to a mechanics lien should be used. At the following link you will find a proper form to achieve this purpose: https://www.porterlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/03PRI-Mechanics-Lien-Release.pdf
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Connecticut Supreme Court Further Refines Meaning of "Collapse"

    January 13, 2020 —
    Connecticut courts have been inundated with collapse cases the past couple of years due to insureds' living in homes that were constructed with defective concrete manufactured by J.J. Mottes Concrete Company. In a duo of cases, the Connecticut Supreme Court responded to a certified question from the U.S. District Court, holding that collapse required that the building be in imminent danger of falling down. Vera v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2019 Conn. LEXIS 339 (Conn. Nov. 12, 2019). Plaintiffs had resided in their home since 2009. The home was built in 1993. In August 2015, after learning about the problem of crumbling basement walls affecting homes in their community due to cement manufactured by Mottes, they retained a structural engineer to evaluate their basement walls. The engineer found spider web cracking approximately 1/16 of an inch wide in the basement walls and three small vertical cracks. There were no visible signs of bowing. The engineer did not find that the walls were in imminent danger of falling down, but recommended that the basement walls be replaced. Plaintiffs submitted a claim under their homeowners policy to Liberty Mutual. The claim was denied. The policy did not define collapse, but stated that collapse did not include "settling, cracking, shrinking, bulging or expansion." 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

    Southern California Lost $8 Billion in Construction Wages

    August 17, 2011 —

    Los Angeles and Orange Counties are first on a list no area wants to be on. According to the Sacramento Bee, reporting on data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, LA and Orange Counties saw an $8 billion drop in construction wages in 2010, as compared to 2006. In 2006, the region saw payrolls of $26.8 billion, but in 2010, that was reduced to $18.5 billion.

    This was not the largest percentage change. Of the metropolitan areas with the largest declines in construction earnings, Las Vegas saw a $3.6 billion drop, however that represented half of their 2006 totals of $7.2 billion. Conversely, a $3.3 billion drop in the New York area represented only 10% of what had been $33.8 billion in payroll in 2006.

    Read the full story…

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

    Virginia Decision Emphasizes Importance of Naming All Necessary Parties

    June 17, 2015 —
    Nate Budde on the Construction Payment Blog, discussed the potential of mechanics liens, and the pitfalls that occur when not all necessary parties are named. Budde analyzed the case Johnson Controls Inc. v. Norair Eng’g Corp. that involved a “claimant’s failure to name all the necessary parties in his claim against a bond,” resulting “in the claimant losing his claim against the bond, and with it, an opportunity to get paid.” Budde concluded, “Unfortunately, as was the case here, when the bond claim is not handled correctly procedurally, a party can be left with no recourse for payment. It’s important to understand which of the parties involved should be named in both mechanics lien claims and bond claims.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    October 14, 2013 —
    The Texas Supreme Court has concluded in Lennar Corp. v. Markel Am. Ins. Co. that “the costs incurred by a builder to locate and repair damage caused by the builder’s defective product are covered under its general liability insurance policy.” Hunton & Williams have issued a Client Alert discussing the case. For the background of the case, Lennar built about 800 homes using EIFS. The EIFS trapped water and the homes suffered from rot, structural damage, mold, mildew, and termites. Lennar fixed all the homes so built, avoiding litigation. Lennar “notifed its insurers of the defects and invited its insurers to participate in the proactive remediation program.” A lower court had agreed with Markel, one of Lennar’s insurers, that the losses were not “caused by property damage,” and that Lennar should not have made “voluntary payments without Markel’s consent.” The Texas Supreme Court granted review, rejecting Markel’s argument and affirming the jury’s finding. According to Hunton & Williams, the implications of the Texas Lennar decision is that it “confirms that all insurers with policy in effect at the time of property damage are responsible for all sums for which the policyholder is liable.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurance Agent Sued for Lapse in Coverage after House Collapses

    October 29, 2014 —
    Property Casualty 360 reported a Hawaii case where the court ruled that an “insurance brokerage firm is responsible for the wrongful conduct of its employees, agents and independent contractors as long as they give the public the appearance that the individual is working as an agent of the brokerage.” The case involved a home that collapsed “during an attempted structural renovation.” The original insurance policy had lapsed, and the “application used to procure the second policy stated that there was no renovation work underway on the property, and thus contained a material misrepresentation which voided the second policy, the [homeowners] were left without insurance on the house.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Cutting the Salt Out: Tips for Avoiding Union Salting Charges

    January 10, 2018 —
    The strategy to avoid union salts is rather simple. But, simplicity does not mean easy. The process requires discipline. A salt is a paid union organizer that attempts to gain employment with a non-union employer for the purpose of either (a) organizing the employers workforce or (b) bringing a costly unfair labor practice charge for discriminatory hiring practices. A “covert salt” is someone who conceals his union affiliation in order to gain employment with a non-union employer for the purpose of starting a union organizing campaign. Actually, conceal is an understatement. Covert salts actively lie to gain employment with a non-union employer. Covert salts apply for jobs under false names, social security numbers, and use bogus resumes. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    The Final Frontier Opens Up New Business Opportunities for Private Contractors

    August 26, 2024 —
    Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Defense (“DOD”) issued its Commercial Space Integration Strategy. While arguably still in the early stages of implementation, this policy shows a significant shift in creating new opportunities for contractors to work with and sell commercial solutions to DOD. This creates big opportunities for the construction industry. DOD’s current construction budget is over $2.9 billion,[1] and seeking to increase funding and projects with the private sector also increases the need for construction of facilities to house those partnerships. For contractors who may be able to take advantage of these opportunities and the facilities that support them, it is worth having an understanding of what a prospective contractor would need to do to participate and what pitfalls may be attached to these programs. In an effort to call out the elephant in the room, the timing of these policies coming out in the year before an election should not be ignored. While grounded in the 2022 National Defense Strategy and other established departmental policies, a change in administration could create change in how these prospective opportunities are handled. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica S. Allain, Jones Walker
    Ms. Allain may be contacted at jallain@joneswalker.com