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


    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Museums

    Home Repair Firms Sued for Fraud

    Blackstone to Buy Apartments From Greystar in $2 Billion Deal

    John Boyden, Alison Kertis Named “Top Rank Attorneys” by Nevada Business Magazine

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dispose of Hail Damage Claim Fails

    Not Pandemic-Proof: The Ongoing Impact of COVID-19 on the Commercial Construction Industry

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

    Citigroup Reaches $1.13 Billion Pact Over Mortgage Bonds

    Sold Signs Fill Builder Lots as U.S. Confidence Rises: Economy

    Reminder: Just Being Incorporated Isn’t Enough

    Construction Contracts and The Uniform Commercial Code: When Does it Apply and Understanding the Pre-Dominant Factor Test

    Loss Caused by Subcontractor's Faulty Work Covered in Georgia

    BWB&O’s Motion for Summary Judgment is Granted in a Premises Liability Matter

    Winter COVID-19 Relief Bill: Overview of Key Provisions

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    ICC/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Green Model Code Integrates Existing Standards

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    Documentation Important for Defending Construction Defect Claims

    ASCE and Accelerator for America Release Map to Showcase Projects from Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Newmeyer & Dillion Partner Aaron Lovaas & Casey Quinn Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Keeping Up With Fast-moving FAA Drone Regulations

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard

    Strict Liability or Negligence? The Proper Legal Standard for Inverse Condemnation caused by Water Damage to Property

    Wichita Condo Association Files Construction Defect Lawsuit

    A Retrospective As-Built Schedule Analysis Can Be Used to Support Delay

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

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    The “Right to Repair” Construction Defects in the Rocky Mountain and Plains Region

    Asbestos Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Louisiana 13th in List of Defective Bridges

    Back Posting with Thoughts on Lien Waivers

    “Rip and Tear” Damage Remains Covered Under CGL Policy as “Accident”—for Now.

    Product Liability Economic Loss Rule and “Other Property” Damage

    Defining Constructive Acceleration

    First-Time Buyers Home Sales Stagnates

    Enhanced Geothermal Energy Could Be the Next Zero-Carbon Hero

    Pre-Covid Construction Contracts Unworkable as Costs Surge, Webuild Says

    Todd Seelman Recognized as Fellow of Wisconsin Law Foundation

    Formal Request for Time Extension Not Always Required to Support Constructive Acceleration

    9th Circuit Closes the Door on “Open Shop” Contractor

    It Was a Wild Week for Just About Everyone. Ok, Make that Everyone.

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2024 “Atlanta 500” List

    THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ACT (SB800) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS NOT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURIES WHETHER OR NOT THE UNDERLYING DEFECTS GAVE RISE TO ANY PROPERTY DAMAGE in McMillin Albany LL
    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

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    October 18, 2021 —
    If the floods don’t get you, lack of electricity or a swamped hospital might. Nearly a quarter of U.S. critical infrastructure—utilities, airports, police stations and more—is at risk of being inundated by flooding, according to a new report by First Street Foundation, a Brooklyn nonprofit dedicated to making climate risk more visible to the public. Around 25% of national critical infrastructure is at risk. Roughly 14% of Americans’ properties face direct risk from major storms, but the study shows danger extends far from those property lines. Reprinted courtesy of Leslie Kaufman, Bloomberg, Rachael Dottle, Bloomberg and Mira Rojanasakul, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractor Allegedly Injured after Slipping on Black Ice Files Suit

    January 22, 2014 —
    Albert Jimenez, a contractor working in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania “has filed a civil action against the real estate group that owns the complex over claims that he became injured after slipping on black ice at the property” according to the Pennsylvania Record. The defendant, The Council of Fairmont, is accused “of negligence for failing to identify the dangerous defect in the parking lot, in this case, the patch of black ice, and failing to correct the hazardous condition,” the Pennsylvania Record reports. “Jimenez seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, plus interest and litigation costs.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nailing Social Media: The Key to Generating Leads for Construction Companies

    March 13, 2023 —
    Social media has become a powerful tool for small to medium-sized construction companies to generate leads for both residential and commercial projects. With over 3 billion people using social media worldwide, there is a huge opportunity for construction companies to reach potential customers and promote their services. Following are some tips for contractors to use social media to generate leads and improve their revenue targets in 2023. Firstly, it is important to choose the right social media platforms. Different social media platforms have different user demographics and can be more effective for certain types of projects. For example, Facebook and Instagram are popular platforms for residential projects, while LinkedIn is more effective for commercial projects. By understanding the target audience and selecting the right social media platforms, small construction companies can improve the effectiveness of their social media marketing efforts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com

    Late Filing Contractor Barred from Involving Subcontractors in Construction Defect Claim

    March 01, 2012 —

    The Colorado Court of Appeals looked at that state’s Construction Defect Action Reform Act in determining if a general contractor could add subcontractors as third-party defendants to a construction defect lawsuit. Shaw Construction, LLC was the general contraction of the Roslyn Court condominium complex, and was sued by the homeowners’ association in a construction defect case. United Builder Services was the drywall subcontractor on the project. MB Roofing had installed roofs, gutters, and downspouts. The certificate of occupancy for the last building was issued on March 10, 2004. The project architect certified completion of all known remaining architectural items in June, 2004.

    The HOA filed a claim against the developers of the property on January, 21, 2009. A week later, the HOA amended its complaint to add Shaw, the general contractor. Shaw did not file its answer and third-party complaint until March 29, 2010, sending its notice of claim under the CDARA on March 30.

    The subcontractors claimed that the six-year statute of limitations had ended twenty days prior. Shaw claimed that the statute of limitations ran until six years after the architect’s certification, or that the HOA’s suit had tolled all claims.

    The trial court granted summary judgment to the subcontractors, determining that “substantial completion occurs ‘when an improvement to real property achieves a degree of completion at which the owner can conveniently utilize the improvement of the purpose it was intended.’”

    The appeals court noted that “Shaw correctly points out that the CDARA does not define ‘substantial completion.’” The court argued that Shaw’s interpretation went against the history and intent of the measure. “Historically, a construction professional who received a complaint responded by ‘cross-nam[ing] or add[ing] everybody and anybody who had a part to play in the construction chain.’” The court concluded that the intent of the act was to prevent unnamed subcontractors from being tolled.

    The court further rejected Shaw’s reliance on the date of the architect’s certification as the time of “substantial completion,” instead agreeing with the trial court that “the architect’s letter on which Shaw relies certified total completion.”

    The appeals court upheld the trial court’s determination that the statute of limitation began to run no later than March 10, 2004 and that Shaw’s complaint of March 29, 2010 was therefore barred. The summary judgment was upheld.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    The Devil is in the Details: The Texas Construction Trust Fund Pitfalls Residential Remodelers (and General Contractors) Should Avoid

    December 26, 2022 —
    A tale of Texas Construction Trust Account woe. You’re a contractor running a business doing interior remodels for clients in a major metropolitan Texas area. You sign up clients with a contract developed by our friends at LegalZoom and get your team to work. Three months into your remodeling project with Mr. and Mrs. “you thought they were happy” Clients, you get this letter: “Consistent with the requirements of §162.006 and §162.007 of the Texas Property Code, Mr. and Mrs. “you thought they were happy” Clients demand a full and complete accounting of all funds you have received from any source relating to this project.” What should you do? Should you ignore it? Should you respond? Fear sets in, you call your crew, and you stop the work. Mr. and Mrs. “you thought they were happy” Clients become Mr. and Mrs. “irate and angry” Clients and they sue you alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and perhaps fraud. Reprinted courtesy of Rochelle Cabe, Kahana Feld and Roni Most, Kahana Feld Ms. Cabe may be contacted at rcabe@kahanafeld.com Mr. Most may be contacted at rmost@kahanafeld.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    DC Circuit Issues Two Important Clean Air Act and Administrative Law Decisions

    December 16, 2019 —
    The U.S. Court of Appeals or the District of Columbia has recently issued two important rulings on the Clean Air Act in particular and administrative law in general: California Communities Against Toxics, et al., v. EPA and Murray Energy Corporation v. EPA. The Battle of the Memos: Seitz Makes Way for Wehrum In the California Communities case, decided on August 20, 2019, the court held, in a 2 to 1 decision, that a petition to review a change in EPA policy announced in an agency memorandum which reversed an agency policy announced nearly 25 years ago in another agency memo must be rejected because the memo at issue was not a “final agency action” subject to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In 1995, the “Seitz Memo,” which interpreted Section 112 of the Clean Air Act and addresses the regulation and control of hazardous air pollutants from stationary sources, stated that once a source of toxic emissions is classified as “major,” the facility remains subject to regulation as a major source even if the facility makes changes to the facility to limit its potential to emit such toxics below the major source threshold. Then, in 2018 under a new administration, the “Wehrum Memorandum” was issued which reversed this policy and its interpretation of the law. (Both memos were issued without any kind of advance notice or opportunity to comment.) If a source takes steps to limit its potential to emit, then it may be regulated as an area source, and subject to less rigid regulation. The court majority held that the Wehrum Memo was not a final agency action and was not subject to judicial review when it was measured against both prongs of the “finality test” devised by the Supreme Court in the cases of Bennet v. Spear, 520 US 154 (1997) and US Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes, 136 S. Ct. 1807 (2016). While the memo undoubtedly represented the consummation of the agency’s decision-making process, the memo had no direct and appreciable legal consequences, and not therefore being a final action, the case must be dismissed. Judge Rogers filed a strong dissenting opinion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    What You Need to Know About “Ipso Facto” Clauses and Their Impact on Termination of a Contractor or Subcontractor in a Bankruptcy

    September 12, 2022 —
    While contractor bankruptcies have long been an issue in the construction industry, in the aftermath of COVID-19 and the resultant labor, material and supply-chain delays, contractor bankruptcies are of even greater concern. Many construction contracts attempt to protect the upstream party from a bankruptcy filing of its contractor or subcontractor by providing for an automatic right to terminate a contract, referred to as “ipso facto” clauses. However, such clauses are generally unenforceable as bankruptcy laws, specifically Section 365(e) of Title 11 of the United States Code, protect the party filing for bankruptcy (the “Debtor”) from unilateral termination of the contract by the non-Debtor party. What is an “Ipso Facto” clause? An ipso facto clause is a provision in an agreement which permits its termination by one party due to the bankruptcy, insolvency or financial condition of the other party. Reprinted courtesy of Martha B. Chovanes, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs) and Laurie A. Stanziale, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs) Ms. Chovanes may be contacted at mchovanes@foxrothschild.com Ms. Stanziale may be contacted at lstanziale@foxrothschild.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Will Millennial’s Desire for Efficient Spaces Kill the McMansion?

    September 10, 2014 —
    Builder Magazine reported that millennials are currently “inhabiting high-tech, yet cozy student housing and apartments” without having “outsized space expectations,” however, that may change over the next ten years as “their preference for the walkable convenience that often accompanies smaller living spaces will collide head on with their parents’ (and grandparents’) insatiable addiction for square footage.” Regardless, builders may decide to change based upon a younger generation that accepts “efficient spaces.” According to Builder Magazine, Nick Lenhert, executive director at architectural firm KTGY, argued that the young “don’t really want what mom and dad have until they get married. Then all of a sudden things start to revert. They start getting realistic about what they need for the children and what they need for themselves. [Right now,] Gen Y is used to living in small spaces or with roommates because that’s all they can afford.” However, John Thatch, principal and director of design at the architectural and planning firm Dahlin Group, believes that even as millennials get older and conceivably need greater square footage, there is still a possibility that their tendency toward efficient spaces will continue: “I’m hoping this is the generation [that pulls in house size] because our generation went gigantic. It’s a chance for architects to get back to design smaller, more thoughtful spaces that are flexible.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of