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


    Construction Defect Claims are on the Rise Due to Pandemic-Related Issues

    Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2020 Southern California Rising Stars List

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Recent Amendments and Caselaw Affecting the Construction Industry in Texas

    High Court Case Review Frees Jailed Buffalo Billions Contractor CEO

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Chicago Developer and Trade Group Sue City Over Affordable Housing Requirements

    Final Furnishing Date is a Question of Fact

    Builders Arrested after Building Collapses in India

    House Bill Clarifies Start Point for Florida’s Statute of Repose

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Conflicts of Laws, Deficiency Actions, and Statutes of Limitations – Oh My!

    Manhattan Homebuyers Pay Up as Sales Top Listing Price

    Eleven Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2023 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    Second Circuit Certifies Question Impacting "Bellefonte Rule"

    California Court of Appeal Finds Alleged Inadequate Defense by Insurer-Appointed Defense Counsel Does Not Trigger a Right to Independent Counsel

    Housing Sales Hurt as Fewer Immigrants Chase Owner Dream

    How the Pandemic Pushed the Construction Industry Five Years Into the Future

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    Library to Open with Roof Defect Lawsuit Pending

    Unjust Enrichment Claims When There Is No Binding Contract

    Chicago Aldermen Tell Casino Bidders: This Is a Union Town

    Cities' Answer to Sprawl? Go Wild.

    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    Georgia Federal Court Says Fact Questions Exist As To Whether Nitrogen Is An “Irritant” or “Contaminant” As Used in Pollution Exclusion

    Colorado Mayors Should Not Sacrifice Homeowners to Lure Condo Developers

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    Measure Of Damages for Breach of Construction Contract

    California Court of Appeal Finds Coverage for Injured Worker Despite Contractor's Exclusion

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Invest In America Act Offers 494 Billion In Funding to U.S. Infrastructure and Millions of New Jobs

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Less Than Valiant Effort”

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    Loss of Use From Allegedly Improper Drainage System Triggers Defense Under CGL Policy

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    Purse Tycoon Aims at Ultra-Rich With $85 Million Home

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    America’s Bridges and the Need for Bridge Infrastructure Investment

    District Court Allows DBE False Claims Act Case to Proceed

    Two More Lawsuits Filed Over COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    CGL Policies and the Professional Liabilities Exclusion

    Benefit of the Coblentz Agreement and Consent Judgment
    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

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    July 02, 2014 —
    The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the “Nevada Supreme Court has rejected a request for class action status for claims of damaged stucco from faulty construction by Del Webb Communities involving nearly 1,000 Sun City Summerlin residents,” however, “the court upheld the award of damages to 71 homeowners following a jury trial in Clark County District Court in 2008.” The case began in 2003, and the Las Vegas Review-Journal referred to it as “one of the largest construction-defect cases in Nevada history.” But District Judge Allan Earl denied class action lawsuit in 2006. “Attorneys were seeking $70 million for the homeowners.” In 2008, another court “determined that only 71 homeowners merited compensation totaling $4 million for the stucco issues.” According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “[h]omeowners alleged that Del Webb failed to install metal screeds that would protect homes from water damage, and as a result, the homes suffered from cracked stucco, mold and weakened walls.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    October 25, 2013 —
    Construction Lawyers, LLP has announced that it has settled two Florida construction defect suits, both of which were filed by condominium associations. The first of these involved the Estates at Park Central Condominium Association, a 244-unit condominium complex in Orlando Florida. The condominium association alleged leaks into balconies and garages, and deficiencies in stucco application. After nearly three years since the filing of the lawsuit, and only weeks before the trial was to begin, the case was settled for $2 million. The second case has also spent the last three years in mediation, however its trial date was further away. The Grand Venezia Condominium Owners Association alleged construction defects including leaking roofs and windows, and improperly installed stucco, leading to dry rot and water damage. The condominium community comprises 336 units in Clearwater, Florida and the units were originally built as apartments. Here, the settlement with the contractor was for $2.75 million. A lawsuit against the developer continues. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    'Taylor Swift Is an Economic Phenomenon': CE's Q1 2024 Economic Update and Forecast

    April 29, 2024 —

    On March 27, Construction Executive presented its "2024 Q1 Economic Update and Forecast," hosted by ABC Chief Economist Anirban Basu. If you've attended previous versions of this webinar, you're familiar with Basu’s pragmatic approach to the economics of the construction industry and his penchant for predicting recession. But this quarter, he opted for an almost-optimistic approach and hinted at walking back his thoughts on recession. Read the most quotable moments, new poll results and top takeaways from the presentation below.

    POLL RESULTS: Q1 2024 vs. Q4 2023 Poll 1: Which of these is the leading challenge for your company today?

    Supply chain and/or materials issues

    Skills/worker shortage

    Insufficient demand for construction services

    Availability of financing for projects/project work

    None of the above

    December 2023March 2024
    10% 7%
    57% 60%
    11% 11%
    19% 17%
    3% 6%

    Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.

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

    Social Engineering Scams Are On the Rise – Do I Have Insurance Coverage for That?

    June 01, 2020 —
    Cyber attackers all know that the majority of organizations are currently working from home due to the ongoing COVID-19 (commonly referred to as the Coronavirus) pandemic. And, as would be expected, social engineering scams are on the rise. Nonetheless, there may be limitations in your cyber liability insurance policy for these types of claims. It is advisable to take the initiative to review such insurance policies in detail for coverage considerations prior to the occurrence of any cyber incident. And, of course, protect your business from attacks by engaging in precautious cyber safety efforts. What Is Social Engineering? Social engineering refers to various means to manipulate individuals in the online environment so that they divulge sensitive, personal information, such as banking information, which may include account numbers and passwords. This can also take the form of receiving a request to transfer funds to what the victim believes is another employee, trusted financial information or other party with whom the person has a business relationship with. Unfortunately, however, those funds ultimately are received by the engineer of the cyber attack. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey M. Dennis, Newmeyer Dillion and Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Dennis may be contacted at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Be Proactive, Not Reactive, To Preserve Force Majeure Rights Regarding The Coronavirus

    March 30, 2020 —
    If you are involved in construction, NOW is the time to consider the potential force majeure impacts associated with the pandemic Coronavirus. Things are beginning to drastically change on a minute-by-minute basis. From travel restrictions, to the suspension or cancellation of events on an international level, to company-wide policies and restrictions, the global uncertainty has led to the possibility that a force majeure delay will occur. Thinking otherwise is not being proactive. The Coronavirus, and the impacts / delays associated therewith, is beyond anyone’s control. Due to the uncertainty, it is hard to fathom at this time a reasonable challenge to someone’s reaction to this concern or their companywide response to the concern.
      If you are a contractor, subcontractor, or even a supplier, my suggestions would be as follows:
    1. Revisit your contracts and see what type of force majeure language it has – anything relating to delays beyond your control or epidemics;
    2. Examine to see whether you have a basis for additional compensation AND additional time;
    3. Examine what type of notice you are required to provide for force majeure events;
    4. Be proactive – send notice now of the potentiality that this pandemic can impact / delay the job –no one should take offense to this letter as this pandemic has impacted all walks of life;
    5. If an impact occurs, send follow-up notice accordingly to ensure rights under the contract are preserved; and
    6. For future contracts, incorporate language that specifically addresses epidemics and pandemics now that the occurrence of this issue has become real.
    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

    More (and Simpler) Options Under New Oregon Retention Law

    October 21, 2024 —
    Similar to the changes made by the Washington Legislature last year, the Oregon Legislature recently changed its retention law. Oregon public works agencies and large commercial project owners are now required to accept surety bonds in lieu of withholding retainage on construction projects. There is also no longer a requirement to deposit retention funds in an interest-bearing escrow account. The owner or public agency must accept the bond in lieu of retainage unless specific grounds exist. For example, public agencies must find there is “good cause” for rejection of the bond based on the “unique project circumstances. Private owners have less discretion to reject a bond and if the bond meets the statutory requirements, per ORS 701.435(1)(a) “the owner and lender shall accept” the bond “in lieu of all or any portion of the retainage…” Courts have not analyzed when “good cause” exists for public agencies to reject bonds or exactly what will allow a private owner to reject a bond. However, an agency or owner cannot have a general policy to reject retention bonds. The statute does not provide next steps if the contractor disagrees with a decision to reject the bond. It may be necessary to proceed under the contract’s dispute resolution procedure or it may be more appropriate to take the issue directly to the courts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael Yelle, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Yelle may be contacted at michael.yelle@acslawyers.com

    Citigroup Pays Record $697 Million for Hong Kong Office Tower

    June 18, 2014 —
    Citigroup Inc. (C) paid a record HK$5.4 billion ($697 million) to a unit of Wheelock & Co. for a Hong Kong office tower that will bring most of its 5,000 employees under one roof. The price for the 512,000 square-foot property in Kowloon is the largest ever office transaction in Hong Kong, the New York-based bank said in a statement yesterday. The tower, scheduled for completion by the end of 2015, will be used to house staff currently spread out across offices in the city, said Weber Lo, the bank’s chief executive officer for Hong Kong and Macau. Citigroup joins banks and insurers in buying buildings in the city as falling vacancies pose a challenge for companies looking for large office spaces, realtor CBRE Group Inc., which advised the deal, said in a first-quarter review report. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Yun, Bloomberg
    Ms. Yun may be contacted at myun11@bloomberg.net

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    February 07, 2018 —
    McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court (01.18.18) ____ Cal.4th _____ (2018 WL 456728) The California Supreme Court confirmed that the Right to Repair Act (CA Civil Code § 895, et seq. and often referred to by its legislative nomenclature as “SB800”) applies broadly to any action by a residential owner seeking recovery of damages for construction defects, regardless of whether such defects caused property damages or only economic losses. This includes the right in the Act of the builder to attempt repairs prior to the owner filing a lawsuit. Background Homeowners sued builder for construction defects. Included in their causes of action was a cause of action for violation of the Right To Repair Act. The Act requires that before filing litigation, a homeowner must give the builder notice and engage in a nonadversarial prelitigation process which gives the builder a right to repair the defects. The builder asked the court to stay the homeowners’ action so the prelitigaiton process could be undertaken. Rather than give the builder the repair right, the homeowners dismissed the particular cause of action from their case, leaving only other so-called common law and warranty causes of action. The common law claims sought recovery for property damage caused by the defects. The builder nonetheless asked to the Court to stay the action so it could exercise its right to repair. The trial court, relying on Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, denied builder’s request to stay the action. The Liberty Mutual Court concluded that certain common law construction defect claims fell outside the purview of the Act. Builder appealed. The Court of Appeal disagreed with Liberty Mutual, so did not follow it, granted the builder’s request for a stay, and directed that the homeowners afford the builder the right to repair the claimed defects as provided under the Act. The California Supreme Court affirmed, disapproving Liberty Mutual and the subsequent cases relying on it. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Wallace, Smith Currie
    Mr. Wallace may be contacted at swwallace@smithcurrie.com