BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut building code compliance expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    Public-Employee Union Fees, Water Wars Are Key in High Court Rulings

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Appraisers Limited to Determining Amount of Loss

    How Many New Home Starts are from Teardowns?

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    The 2023 Term of the Supreme Court: Administrative and Regulatory Law Rulings

    The Latest News on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

    City of Seattle Temporarily Shuts Down Public Works to Enforce Health and Safety Plans

    No Trial Credit in NJ Appellate Decision for Non-Settling Successive Tortfeasors – Must Demonstrate Proof of Initial Tortfeasor Negligence and Proximate Cause

    Resolving Condominium Construction Defect Warranty Claims in Maryland

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims

    Remote Depositions in the Post-Covid-19 World

    Sioux City Building Owners Sue Architect over Renovation Costs

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    Substituting Materials and Failure to Comply with Contractual Requirements

    Elevators Take Sustainable Smart Cities to the Next Level

    Limitation on Coverage for Payment of Damages Creates Ambiguity

    Be Careful with Mechanic’s Lien Waivers

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    PulteGroup Fires Exec Accused of Defamation By Founder’s Heir

    Structural Defects Lead Schools to Close off Areas

    OSHA Launches Program to Combat Trenching Accidents

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Despite Construction Defects

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    Denver Passed the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

    Georgia Appellate Court Supports County Claim Against Surety Company’s Failure to Pay

    Insurance Client Alert: Mere Mailing of Policy and Renewals Into California is Not Sufficient Basis for Jurisdiction Over Bad Faith Lawsuit

    Just How Climate-Friendly Are Timber Buildings? It’s Complicated

    What is Toxic Mold Litigation?

    Mortenson Subcontractor Fires Worker Over Meta Data Center Noose

    Partner John Toohey and Senior Associate Sammy Daboussi Obtain a Complete Defense Verdict for Their Contractor Client!

    A Top U.S. Seller of Carbon Offsets Starts Investigating Its Own Projects

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    Affirmed

    What Is the Best Way to Avoid Rezoning Disputes?

    Happy Thanksgiving from CDJ

    Hunton Partner Michael Levine Appointed to Law360’s 2024 Insurance Authority Property Editorial Advisory Board

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    Four White and Williams Lawyers Recognized as "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers®

    Phillips & Jordan Awarded $176M Everglades Restoration Contract

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    Shoring of Problem Girders at Salesforce Transit Center Taking Longer than Expected
    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. Drawing 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

    The Risk of A Fixed Price Contract Is The Market

    August 03, 2022 —
    When performing work on a fixed price or unit, there is risk that is being assumed on your end. One risk is the market. You are ultimately banking on the fact that the market is not going to make your fixed prices unprofitable. That’s not an unforeseeable occurrence because the market shifts and that shift can have a negative ripple effect. In a recent case out of the Federal Circuit, U.S. Aeroteam, Inc. v. U.S., 2022 WL 243176 (Fed.Cir. 2022), this market risk played a role in a fixed price contract. Here, a contractor was hired by the federal government to produce ground support trailers. A key component of these trailers was a running gear. The contractor relied on a vendor for these running gears. Due to financial difficulties, the vendor had to raise its unit price for the running gears. Based on the increased price, the contractor elected to manufacture the running gears itself. The contractor asked the government if this was ok and the government approved the request. Once the contractor started manufacturing these running gears, it had an “awe” moment – the manufacturing costs were higher than anticipated. The contractor submitted a request for equitable adjustment which the government denied. The Contractor than sued the government raising three arguments to support its entitlement to additional costs: (1) constructive change; (2) cardinal change; and (3) commercial impracticability. The contractor lost on all arguments. It probably should have lost on all arguments. 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

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    March 13, 2023 —
    California has a number of prompt payment penalty statutes on the books. Among them is Civil Code section 8800 which requires project owners on private works projects to pay progress payments to direct contractors within 30 days after demand for payment pursuant to contract or be subject to prompt payment penalties of two percent (2%) per month on the amount wrongfully withheld. Like California’s other prompt payment penalty statutes, however, there is an important carve out: If there is a good faith dispute between the project owner and the direct contractor the project owner may withhold up to 150% of the dispute amount and not be subject to prompt payment penalties. And that, my friends, is a higher-tiered party’s “get out of jail free” card. In a case of first impression, the 1st District Court of Appeals, in Vought Construction Inc. v. Stock (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 622, examined whether a project owner’s claim for liquidated damages constitutes a good faith dispute under Civil Code section 8800. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    December 16, 2023 —
    Thank you once again to those in the Virginia legal community who elected me to the Virginia Business Legal Elite in the Construction Law category for the 17th consecutive year. The 17 consecutive years of election to the Legal Elite in the Construction Category span my entire close to 14 years as a solo construction attorney. The fact that you all have continued to elect “100%” of the lawyers at The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC for the last 13 years is most gratifying and only confirms that my decision to “go solo” over 13 years ago was a good one. To be included in this list of top construction attorneys is both humbling and gratifying. For the complete list of the Virginia construction lawyers who were elected along with me, see the 2023 Virginia Business Legal Elite in Construction Law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    December 21, 2016 —
    National Grid, which serves New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, is set to be the second U.S. natural-gas utility to use technology advanced by Google Earth, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and Colorado State University to boost large-scale methane-leak detection. It is launching a $3-billion effort to replace gas pipelines in New York. The technology uses cutting-edge spatial analytics methods and methane sensors, specially fitted to Google Street View cars, to identify leaks and accurately measure the amount of methane escaping. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    November 28, 2022 —
    Finding faulty workmanship that did not cause property damage beyond the subcontractor's work, the court found there was no coverage under the CGL policy. Middlesex Ins. Co. v. Dixie Mech., Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175190 (N. D. Ga. Sept. 27, 2022).  The case involved a construction project on Elba Island, Georgia. IHI E&C International Corporation (IHI) filed suit against Robinson Mechanical Contractors ("Robinson") for faulty construction work, including a pipe rack and process module installation. The pipe racks allegedly contained defective welds. Robinson filed a third-party complaint against Patriot Modular, Inc. (Patriot), Robinson's subcontractor, for faulty work for IHI. Finally, Patriot filed a fourth-party complaint against Dixie Mechanical, Inc. (Dixie), alleging it subcontracted with Dixie to perform fabrication, welding, testing, and inspection of pipes under Patriot's subcontract with Robinson. Patriot contended that to the extent it was found liable to Robinson for any defective work, delays or breaches of contract for Dixie's work, Patriot was entitled to recover such amounts from Dixie. In this case, Dixie's insurer, Middlesex Insurance Company, sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend or to indemnify Dixie. Middlesex contended that the claims of faulty workmanship in the underlying complaints constituted neither an "occurrence" nor "property damage." 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

    Subcontractor Allowed to Sue Designer for Negligence: California Courts Chip Away at the Economic Loss Doctrine (Independent Duty Rule)

    August 30, 2017 —
    An architect may have to pay over $1 million to a subcontractor who was contractually obligated to rely on the designer’s plans – even though the architect was not a party to the contract.[1] That was the ruling in U.S. f/u/b/o Penn Air Control, Inc. v. Bilbro Constr. Co., Inc.[2] The dispute involved a $7.3 million design-build contract award to Bilbro Construction (“Bilbro”) to renovate a facility for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command in Monterey, California. Bilbro hired an architect (“FPBA”) to serve as the designer of record and provide all the architectural design services. FPBA’s design team included an acoustical sub-consultant (Sparling). The general contractor (design builder) also retained Alpha Mechanical (Alpha) as the mechanical electrical and plumbing (“MEP”) design/build subcontractor. Alpha, in turn, subcontracted the MEP design to Shadpour Consulting Engineers. During the design phase of this project, Alpha’s MEP design was reviewed by FPBA, Bilbro, and Sparling at the 35, 75, and 100 percent design completion levels. Alpha demonstrated that it regularly received direct communications during design development from Sparling and FPBA, including comments, changes, and revisions. One example Alpha cited was it raised some concerns about anticipated noise level in eight rooms. Sparling made several recommendations to Alpha and Shadpour that were implemented. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com

    Breach Of Duty of Good Faith And Fair Dealing Packaged With Contract Disputes Act Claim

    March 27, 2023 —
    An interesting opinion on a motion to dismiss came out of the United States Court of Federal Claims dealing with the claim that the government breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing in administering the prime contract. The contractor’s argument was that the government breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing by denying the contractor’s claim under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA). This was a creative claim and argument that deserves consideration because it tied in the contracting officer’s denial of the CDA claim for additional money with a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. In this case, Aries Construction Corp. v. U.S., 2023 WL 2146598 (Fed. Cl. 2023), a prime contractor was hired for a water pipeline construction project. The contractor encountered unexpected difficult site conditions that required additional equipment and labor. The contractor informed the contracting officer and alleged it was instructed to proceed with the additional equipment and labor. The contractor submitted a claim under the CDA but the contracting officer denied the claim. The contractor pursued the claim in the United States Court of Federal Claims arguing the government breached the contract and, of interest, breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing. The government moved to dismiss the breach of good faith and fair dealing claim arguing that besides failing to state a cause of action the Court of Federal Claims had no jurisdiction because the breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing was not properly presented to the contracting officer under the CDA. The Court of Federal Claims denied the government’s motion. 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

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    July 13, 2017 —
    For this week’s Guest Post Friday here at Musings, we welcome Jim Fullerton. Jim is the President of the law firm of Fullerton & Knowles, P.C., which has attorneys licensed in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia, is a Martindale Hubbell Peer Rated Lawyer AV® Preeminent.™ The firm represents owners, lenders, design professionals, suppliers, subcontractors, general contractors and other members of the real estate and construction industries, filing mechanic’s liens, surety bond and other construction claims across all of the states in the Mid Atlantic region. He also represents creditors in bankruptcy issues nationwide, particularly defense of bankruptcy preference claims; advises owners and lenders in real estate lending and acquisition transactions; on all real estate and construction law issues; contract formation and disputes. The firm’s Construction Law Survival Manual is well known and widely used by participants in the construction process. The 550 page manual provides valuable information about construction contract litigation, mechanic’s liens, payment bond claims, bankruptcy and credit management and contains over 30 commonly used contract forms. All of this information and recent construction law issues are constantly updated on the firm’s website. There are two changes to the Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code that became effective September 2014. First, residential properties built by an owner for their own residence will now have a defense of payment to subcontractor mechanic’s liens. This protects homeowners from mechanic’s liens if they have paid their general contractors in full. Second, construction loan open end mortgages will have priority over mechanic’s liens, as long as at least sixty per cent (60%) of the loan proceeds are used for construction costs. This change was pushed by Pennsylvania lenders in response to a recent court case. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com