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


    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    Southern California Super Lawyers Recognizes Four Snell & Wilmer Attorneys As Rising Stars

    SB800 CONFIRMED AS EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS

    Illinois Court Addresses Rip-And-Tear Coverage And Existence Of An “Occurrence” In Defective Product Suit

    Milwaukee's 25-Story Ascent Stacks Up as Tall Timber Role Model

    Construction Defects Are Occurrences, Says South Carolina High Court

    North Carolina Soil & Groundwater Case to be Heard by U.S. Supreme Court

    Use of Dispute Review Boards in the Construction Process

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    3 Common Cash Flow Issues That Plague The Construction Industry

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    What You Need to Know About CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Regulations

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Delays Caused When Government (Owner) Pushes Contractor’s Work Into Rainy / Adverse Weather Season

    PA Superior Court Provides Clarification on Definition of CGL “Occurrence” When Property Damage Is Caused by Faulty Building Conditions

    WSDOT Excludes Non-Minority Women-Owned DBEs from Participation Goals

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    Ivanhoe Cambridge Plans Toronto Office Towers, Terminal

    Fixing the Problem – Not the Blame

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Boots on the Ground- A Great Way to Learn and Help Construction Clients

    Insurance Policy’s “No Voluntary Payment” Clauses Lose Some Bite in Colorado

    Design and Construction Defects Not a Breach of Contract

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    Power to the Office Worker

    Ahlers, Cressman & Sleight PLLC Ranked Top Washington Law Firm By Construction Executive

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    Diggin’ Ain’t Easy: Remember to Give Notice Before You Excavate in California

    Utah Becomes First State to Enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act

    BOOK CLUB SERIES: Everything You Want to Know About Construction Arbitration But Were Afraid to Ask

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

    No Coverage for Home Damaged by Falling Boulders

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    Another Guilty Plea in Las Vegas HOA Scandal

    “Made in America Week” Highlights Requirements, Opportunities for Contractors and Suppliers

    Peru’s Former President and His Wife to Stay in Jail After Losing Appeal

    New York Signs Biggest Offshore Wind Project Deal in the Nation

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    House Panel Subpoenas VA Documents on Colorado Project

    The Firm Hits the 9 Year Mark!

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion on Business Risk Exclusions Fails

    A Court-Side Seat: As SCOTUS Decides Another Regulatory “Takings” Case, a Flurry of Action at EPA

    Lien Attaches To Landlord’s Interest When Landlord Is Party To Tenant Improvement Construction Contract

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    In Pennsylvania, Contractors Can Be Liable to Third Parties for Obvious Defects in Completed Work

    Colorado House Bill 19-1170: Undefined Levels of Mold or Dampness Can Make a Leased Residential Premises Uninhabitable
    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

    Supreme Court’s New York Harbor Case Isn’t a ‘Sopranos’ Episode

    August 03, 2022 —
    The long-simmering harbor dispute between New York and New Jersey has observers reaching for illustrations from “The Sopranos” and “On the Waterfront.” But now that the US Supreme Court has agreed to adjudicate the spat, I wonder whether a more useful resource might be “The Paper Chase.” The disagreement stems from New Jersey’s determination to exit the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, an entity established by the two states back in 1953 in response to news reports of widespread corruption and violence among those who loaded and unloaded ships. New Jersey argues that as a sovereign state, it can’t be forced to remain in the pact forever. New York replies that the deal has the force of law and neither state can quit without the permission of the other. (And Congress!) The Supreme Court is now involved because that’s the venue the Constitution prescribes when one state sues another. Four days before New Jersey’s announced departure date of March 28, the justices issued an injunction preventing the move. This week they agreed to adjudicate the dispute and set an accelerated schedule for briefs and oral argument. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg

    Vacation Rentals: Liability of the Owner for Injury Suffered by the Renter

    May 13, 2019 —
    With the explosion of the “private” rental business wherein residential property owners rent their house or condo on a short-term basis to third-parties, certain legal issues have arisen with regard to the duties owed by the property owner to the renter. A recent Virginia Supreme Court case, Haynes-Garrett v. Dunn, 818 S.E.2d 798 (Va. 2018), addressed that issue. In that case, the property owners owned a rental house in Virginia Beach. The property was not the owners’ main residence, but rather a vacation home that was sometimes used by the owners, but mostly used as a rental. The issue addressed by the court was whether – for the purpose of evaluating the owners’ duty of care to the renter – the relationship should be classified as a “landlord-tenant” relationship or an “innkeeper-guest” relationship. This classification was important because the duties of the owner to the renter were significantly different depending on the category. In the landlord-tenant arena, under Virginia law, the landlord has no duty to maintain the property in a safe condition because the property is deemed to be under the tenant’s exclusive control. (An exception being concealment or fraud by the landlord as to some defect in the premises that is known to the landlord but unknown to the tenant.) Assuming that exception does not apply, the tenant takes the premises in whatever condition they may be in, thus assuming all risk of personal injury from defects or dangerous conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin J. Parker, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Parker may be contacted at kparker@swlaw.com

    Contractors Admit Involvement in Kickbacks

    December 09, 2011 —

    Two New Jersey contractors have pleaded guilty to charges that they made false representations for a government contract in a case related to kickbacks for construction work done in two school districts. New Jersey is recommending that the two men, Martin Starr and Stephen Gallagher, will each pay $50,000 in penalties, serve up to a year in jail, and be unable to accept public contracts for five years.

    Last month, another individual in the case, Kenneth Disko, who had been the engineer for the school district, pleaded guilty on a similar charge. In addition to a $50,000 penalty, he will be serving three to five years in prison. A fourth conspirator, Robert Berman, the former business administrator for one of the school districts, has to pay a $13,000 fine and cooperate with the investigation. He is also barred from public employment in New Jersey and has been terminated from his position.

    Starr admitted to preparing fictitious quotes which appeared to be from other contractors in order that his firm would seem to be the lowest bidder. Gallagher helped in preparing the fictitious bids and also provided cash kickbacks to Disko.

    Read the full story…

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

    Force Majeure Under the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic

    March 29, 2021 —
    As COVID-19 disrupts work and life as we know it, the question many contractors have is what protections are available against the inevitable project impacts and delays? Generally, construction contracts require a contractor to timely perform work until project completion or potentially face damages (liquidated or actual) and possible termination. When events occur, however, that are beyond our control (such as a national pandemic), it is important to review and understand what contract provisions or avenues are available for potential relief.
    1. Review Your Contract For A Force Majeure Provision.
    2. A “force majeure” contract provision is commonly included in construction contracts, service agreements, purchase orders, etc. It typically covers events or conditions that can be neither anticipated nor controlled. These provisions, however, will vary greatly from contract to contract and may not include the language “force majeure” but rather may be included in general delay or impact clauses. For example, some common provisions include:
      • Washington State Department of Transportation Clause (2018 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction): The Contractor shall rebuild, repair, restore, and make good all damages to any portion of the permanent or temporary Work occurring before the Physical Completion Date and shall bear all the expense to do so, except damage to the permanent Work caused by: (a) acts of God, such as earthquake, floods, or other cataclysmic phenomenon of nature, or (b) acts of the public enemy or of governmental authorities; or (c) slides in cases where Section 2-03.3(11) is applicable; Provided, however, that these exceptions shall not apply should damages result from the Contractor’s failure to take reasonable precautions or to exercise sound engineering and construction practices in conducting the Work.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay T. Watkins, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Watkins may be contacted at Lindsay.Watkins@acslawyers.com

    Substitutions On a Construction Project — A Specification Writer Responds

    July 03, 2022 —
    In response to the post about Substitute Materials on a construction project, Phil Kabza explains how his company, SpecGuy, handles tracking of all such materials on a project. Phil writes: Excellent and important topic, about which there is much confusion among design professionals and contractors. We try to maintain definitions for:
    • Pre-bid requests for prior approval of proposed comparable products where products are named in the specifications
    • True pre-bid substitution requests that present an alternate type of product from that specified (ie., not “comparable” but perhaps suitable)
    • Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett
      Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

      Virginia Tech Has Its Own Construction Boom

      May 10, 2013 —
      The last few years has been a tough time for the construction industry, unless you’re in the proximity to the campus of Virginia Tech. Since 1999, the school has seen more than $1 billion in construction projects. Charles Steger, the president of the university says that “we have no intention of slowing down.” Steger views some of the construction as vital to the school’s mission, noting that at Davidson Hall, which contains chemistry laboratories, “the wiring and other facilities were almost a health hazard.” The building is undergoing a $31 million renovation. In order to keep the campus walkable, parking lots are being replaced by parking garages. Four dormitory buildings will be demolished and replaced by new facilities. Funds for the development have come from a mix of student fees, donations, research revenues, bond issues, and taxpayer revenues. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of

      General Liability Alert: A Mixed Cause of Action with Protected and Non-Protected Activity Not Subject to Anti-SLAPP Motion

      February 18, 2015 —
      In Baral v. Schnitt (filed 2/5/2015, No. B253620), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, held that California’s anti-SLAPP statute does not authorize the striking of allegations of protected activity in a cause of action that also contains meritorious allegations of non-protected activity not within the purview of the statute. In so holding, the court attempted to resolve, or at least add its voice to, the growing conflict among appellate districts on the issue. A SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) seeks to chill or punish the exercise of constitutional rights to free speech and to petition the government for redress of grievances. California’s Legislature enacted the anti-SLAPP statute to permit a defendant to file a special motion to strike as to any cause of action that arises out of an act in furtherance of such rights. In Baral, the plaintiff alleged that his business partner had violated fiduciary duties in usurping the plaintiff’s ownership and management interests in their jointly owned company, so that the defendant could benefit from a secret sale of the company. The complaint alleged that the defendant hired a public accounting firm and prevented the plaintiff from participating in its investigation in order to force the plaintiff's cooperation of the sale of the company. The defendant filed an anti-SLAPP motion, seeking to strike all references to the accounting firm's audit. The trial court denied the motion, on the ground that the anti-SLAPP statute applies to causes of action, not allegations. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Valerie A. Moore, Lawrence S. Zucker II and Blythe Golay Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com. Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com. Ms. Golay may be contacted at bgolay@hbblaw.com. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of

      House of the Week: Spanish Dream Home on California's Riviera

      July 30, 2014 —
      Famous clients of renowned Los Angeles architect Richard Landry are not known for their restraint. The Brentwood estate he designed for Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen has a moat and just sold to Dr. Dre for $40 million. Michael Jackson died in a home Landry designed (a rental), and he has designed luxurious mansions for Wayne Gretzky, Michael Bolton, Mark Wahlberg and Kenny G. Still, homeowner Lorna Auerbach did something unique when Landry started designing her dream home in Pacific Palisades: She flew him to Spain, with her, for 10 days. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Emily Heffter, Bloomberg