BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut forensic architectFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestrationFairfield Connecticut slope failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural concrete expertFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim 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


    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    Nevada Construction Defect Lawyers Dead in Possible Suicides

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney

    Indiana Federal Court Holds No Coverage for $50M Default Judgment for Lack of Timely Notice of Class Action

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Stay of Coverage Case Appropriate While Court Determines Arbitrability of Dispute

    Insurer Must Defend General Contractor

    Investigation of Orange County Landslide

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    Meet BWB&O’s 2025 Best Lawyers in America!

    Florida trigger

    Florida Former Public Works Director Fined for Ethics Violation

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

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

    Challenging and Defending a California Public Works Stop Payment Notice: Affidavit vs. Counter-Affidavit Process

    Appellate Court Endorses Discretionary Test for Vicarious Disqualification of Law Firms Due To New Attorney’s Conflict

    Hunton’s Alice Weeks Selected to the Miami Dade Bar’s Circle of Excellence for Insurance Litigation

    Seller Faces Federal Charges for Lying on Real Estate Disclosure Forms

    Florida Lawmakers Fail to Reach Agreement on Condominium Safety Bill

    BIM Meets Reality on the Construction Site

    Thanks for Four Years of Recognition from JD Supra’s Readers’ Choice Awards

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Quick Note: Be Careful with Pay if Paid Clauses (Both Subcontractors and General Contractors)

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    Construction Defect Risks Shifted to Insurers in 2013

    So, You Have a Judgment Against a California Contractor or Subcontractor. What Next? How Can I Enforce Payment?

    Let’s Get Specific: Rhode Island Court Asserts Jurisdiction Over Out-of-State Manufacturer

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    In Midst of Construction Defect Lawsuit, City Center Seeks Refinancing

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    Hunton Insurance Group Advises Policyholders on Issues That Arise With Wildfire Claims and Coverage – A Seven-Part Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series

    Back to Basics – Differing Site Conditions

    New Jersey Appellate Court Reinstates Asbestos Action

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies

    Are COVID-19 Claims Covered by Builders Risk Insurance Policies?

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    Denver Council Committee Approves Construction Defects Ordinance

    Google’s Biggest Moonshot Is Its Search for a Carbon-Free Future

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    One More Mechanic’s Lien Number- the Number 30

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael K. Kiernan and Associate Brandon Christian Obtain Dismissal with Prejudice in Favor of Defendant

    Behavioral Science Meets Construction: Insights from Whistle Rewards

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case
    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

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    March 22, 2018 —

    A lienor needs to record its construction lien within 90 days of its final furnishing date. This final furnishing date excludes punchlist, warranty, or the lienor’s own corrective work. A lien recorded outside of the 90-day window will be deemed invalid.

    The opinion in In re: Jennerwein, 309 B.R. 385 (M.D. Fla. 2004) provides a good discussion of this 90-day window. This matter dealt with a debtor / owner’s bankruptcy where the owner was contesting the validity of a construction lien by its pool contractor. The owner contended that the lienor’s lien was recorded outside of this 90-day window thus rendering the lien invalid. The bankruptcy court was determining the validity of the lien.

    In this matter, the owner hired a swimming pool contractor to construct a pool. On October 25, 2002, the pool contractor installed pavers around the pool. After this was performed, the pool contractor realized the owner was unable to obtain the financing to pay for the pool. As a result, the pool contractor ceased doing any more improvements. But, neither the pool contractor nor the owner terminated the contract. Then, on November 27, 2002, the pool contractor sent a supervisor to the property to inspect the pool (work-in-place), the pool equipment, the installed pavers, made a list of the unfinished work, and remove any debris. On January 27, 2003, the pool contractor recorded its lien.

    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

    KB to Spend $43.2 Million on Florida Construction Defects

    August 27, 2013 —
    In their second quarter filing with the SEC, KB Homes estimates that repairing damage caused by defects in framing, stucco, roofs, and sealant will cost it $43.2 million. That estimate includes homes that are yet to be identified. KB had estimated lower costs earlier, but subsequently determined it was necessary to increase the funds by $15.9. As a result, the firm showed a loss in the second quarter. The company hopes to recover some funds in insurance settlements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Claimants’ Demand for Superfluous Wording In Release Does Not Excuse Insurer’s Failure to Accept Policy Limit Offer Within Time Specified

    September 15, 2016 —
    In Barickman v. Mercury Casualty Co. (No. B260833, filed 7/25/16, ord. pub. 8/15/16) a California appeals court affirmed a $3 million bad faith award against Mercury Casualty Co. based upon its failure to accept a policy limit demand within the time provided, finding that wording inserted by the claimants’ counsel into the release did not affect the insured’s rights such that the refusal to agree to the wording was unreasonable and in bad faith, exposing the insurer to liability for the insured’s stipulated judgment. 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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington and Associate Kevin Sullivan Win Summary Judgment Dismissing Homeowner’s Claim that Presented an Issue of First Impression in New Jersey

    December 02, 2019 —
    On July 12, 2019, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP’s Gregory S. Pennington and Kevin Sullivan secured summary judgment dismissing a homeowner’s claim for damaged flooring. The claim at issue arose from the homeowners’ attempt to discard their refrigerator. In the process of removing the refrigerator, the homeowners scratched their kitchen and dining room floors. The homeowners made a claim under their homeowners policy for the cost to repair and replace the damaged flooring. Their homeowners’ insurer denied their claim based on a policy exclusion barring coverage for damage consisting of or caused by marring and scratching. When their insurer denied coverage, the homeowners filed suit in the New Jersey Superior Court, Law Division in Bergen County. The case presented the issue of first impression in New Jersey of whether a homeowner’s self-inflicted, but accidental damaging of its own floors was barred by the homeowner’s policy’s marring or scratching exclusion. Greg and Kevin successfully argued that the exclusion applied to bar coverage. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Pennington, Traub Lieberman and Kevin Sullivan, Traub Lieberman Mr. Pennington may be contacted at gpennington@tlsslaw.com Mr. Sullivan may be contacted at ksullivan@tlsslaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

    February 11, 2019 —
    In its recent decision in Clarendon National Ins. Co. v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., 2019 WL 134614 (D. Mass. Jan. 8, 2019), the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts had occasion to consider the application of a prior knowledge provision in the context of a claim for mold and water-related bodily injury and property damage. Philadelphia insured a condominium property management company under a general liability insurance policy for the period September 1, 2007 through September 1, 2008. In 2009, the insured was sued by a unit owner alleging bodily injury and property damage resulting from toxic mold conditions resulting from leaks that had been identified in her unit as early as 2004. Notably, the complaint alleged that mold was identified in 2006 and that repair efforts were undertaken, but that these efforts all proved unsuccessful. Plaintiff alleged that she was forced to vacate her apartment in 2008 as a result of the conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Margolies, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Margolies may be contacted at bmargolies@tlsslaw.com

    Indicted Union Representatives Try Again to Revive Enmons

    June 22, 2016 —
    The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts AFL-CIO has filed a friend of the court brief seeking to have the indictment of five members of the Teamsters Union in Boston dismissed. The Teamsters members are facing federal charges that they extorted non-union contractors and owners that employed non-union contractors. The Massachusetts AFL-CIO is arguing that under the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in U.S. v. Enmons the Teamsters alleged conduct was in furtherance of a legitimate union objective and, therefore, no illegal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Supplemental Conditions
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports CDCCF Charity at 2014 WCC Seminar

    April 29, 2014 —
    Stop by the Bert L. Howe & Associates (BHA) booth at the 2014 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar at the Disneyland Hotel on May 15th and 16th, and Sink A Putt For Charity! This year, seminar attendees and would-be duffers who try their hand at the golf putting game at the Bert L. Howe & Associates booth will not only have the chance to win a free gift card, they’ll also have the opportunity to help raise funds for a very important cause, the Construction Defect Community Charitable Foundation (CDCCF). Throughout this year’s seminar, with every hole-in-one made at their booth, BHA will make a $25.00 cash donation in the golfer’s name to the CDCCF. Bert L. Howe & Associates strongly supports the goals and principles of the CDCCF, and is honored to assist the foundation in fulfilling its mandate of assisting those in the construction defect community who are in need. Read how the CDCCF assists the construction defect community... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    January 17, 2023 —
    Haight attorneys have been selected to the 2023 Southern California Super Lawyers list. Congratulations to: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP