BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design 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


    Bert L. Howe & Associates Celebrates 21-Year Success Story

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    Damages or Injury “Likely to Occur” or “Imminent” May No Longer Trigger Insurance Coverage

    Jury Finds Broker Liable for Policyholder’s Insufficient Business Interruption Limits

    Earthquake Hits Mid-Atlantic Region; No Immediate Damage Reports

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Updated Covid-19 Standards In The Workplace

    Tennessee High Court Excludes Labor Costs from Insurer’s Actual Cash Value Depreciation Calculations

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

    No Duty to Defend Additional Insured for Construction Defects

    Gordon & Rees Ranked #4 of Top 50 Construction Law Firms in the Nation by Construction Executive Magazine

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

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

    First Look at Long List of AEC Firms Receiving PPP Loans

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    Housing Buoyed by 20-Year High for Vet’s Loans: Mortgages

    Landmark Towers Association, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. or: One Bad Apple Spoils the Whole Bunch

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    Failing to Adopt a Comprehensive Cyber Plan Can Lead to Disaster

    Claim for Collapse After Demolition of Building Fails

    Construction Defects and Warranties in Maryland

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    US Civil Rights Tools Are Failing the Most Polluted Black Communities

    Insurer Incorrectly Relies Upon "Your Work" Exclusion to Deny Coverage

    Remote Work Issues to Consider in Light of COVID-19

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Job Gains a Positive for Housing

    Managing Once-in-a-Generation Construction Problems – Part II

    Delaware Court Holds No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Architectural Firm, Fired by School District, Launches Lawsuit

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors

    Some Work Cannot be Included in a Miller Act Claim

    Congratulations to Partner Vik Nagpal on his Nomination for West Coast Casualty’s Jerrold S. Oliver Award of Excellence!

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    An Overview of the New EPA HVAC Refrigerant Regulations and Its Implications for the Construction Industry

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    Herman Russell's Big Hustle

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/27/21)

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    Condo Owners Suing Bank for Failing to Disclose Defects

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    Contractor Sues Construction Defect Claimants for Defamation

    Chapman Glucksman Press Release
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    December 19, 2018 —
    The multibillion-dollar completion of a nuclear unit at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s unfinished 1,260-MW Bellefonte plant in Alabama is in limbo after the federal power producer refused to complete its sale to Nuclear Development LLC, which has since filed a breach of contract complaint in federal district court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mary B. Powers, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    July 13, 2020 —
    Sometimes, hedging a position on a potential occurrence is not prudent. Stated differently, hedging a position on a contingent event is not the right course of action. The reason being is that a potential occurrence or contingent event is SPECULATIVE. The occurrence or event may not take place and, even if it does take place, the impact is unknown. An example of hedging a defense on such a potential occurrence or contingent event can be found in a construction dispute involving a federal project out of the Eastern District of Virginia, U.S. f/u/b/o Champco, Inc. v. Arch Insurance Co., 2020 WL 1644565 (E.D.Va. 2020). In this case, the prime contractor hired a subcontractor to perform electrical work, under one subcontract, and install a security system, under a separate subcontract. The subcontractor claimed it was owed money under the two subcontracts and instituted a lawsuit against the prime contractor’s Miller Act payment bond. The prime contractor had issued the subcontractor an approximate $71,000 back-charge for delays. While the subcontractor did not accept the back-charge, it moved for summary judgment claiming that the liability for the back-charge can be resolved at trial as there is still over $300,000 in contract balance that should be paid to it. The prime contractor countered that the delays caused by the subcontractor could be greater than $71,000 based on a negative evaluation in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (“CPARS”). A negative CPARS rating by the federal government due to the delays caused by the subcontractor would result in a (potential) loss of business with the federal government (i.e., lost profit) to the prime contractor. The main problem for the prime contractor: a negative CPARs rating was entirely speculative as there had not been a negative CPARs rating and, even if there was, the impact a negative rating would have on the prime contractor’s future business with the federal government was unknown. To this point, the district court stated:
    In this case, [prime contractor’s] claim for damages is wholly speculative. [Prime contractor] has not produced any evidence that its stated condition precedent—a negative CPARS rating—will actually occur and will have a negative impact on its future federal contracting endeavors. Specifically, [prime contractor] has not identified any facts that indicate that it will be subject to a negative CPARS rating or any indication of the Navy’s dissatisfaction with its work as the prime contractor on the Project… Further, a CPARS rating is only one aspect taken into consideration when federal contracts are awarded. In sum, there is no evidence of the following: (1) a negative CPARS rating issued to [prime contractor]; (2) [prime contractor’s] hypothetical negative rating will be the result of the delay [prime contractor] alleges was caused by [subcontractor]; or (3) [prime contractor’s] hypothetical negative CPARS rating will result in future lost profits.
    U.S. f/u/b/o Champco, Inc., supra, at *2 (internal citation omitted).
    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

    A Game of Texas Hold’em: How Texas Stopped Wage Increases for Salaried Exempt Employees Nationwide

    December 03, 2024 —
    Construction contractors often have to deal with classification of employees, particularly those who work in the home office. Today’s guest post by Alexandra Shulman and Leah Lively addresses a recent court decision affecting the wage protection of employees under the the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). On November 15, 2024, a federal court in Texas vacated a U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) rule (the “2024 Rule”) that increased the minimum salary threshold for employees classified as exempt from overtime and minimum wage protections under the FLSA. The Texas court’s decision nullifies the 2024 Rule nationwide, effective immediately. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Buchalter
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@buchalter.com

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    March 01, 2017 —
    In Stock Building Supply, Inc. v. Platte River Insurance Co.,[1] the Court of Appeals dealt with issues of judicial estoppel, bankruptcy, retroactive application of statutory lien amendments, and the full payment defense. The owner, Madison Retail-Suwanee, LLC (“Madison”) hired Cannon/Estapa General Contractors, Inc. (“Cannon”) to be the general contractor for the construction of a shopping center (“the Project”). Cannon subcontracted with Stock Building Supply (“Stock”) to supply labor, materials, and services for the Project. Cannon failed to complete the project and Madison had yet to pay Cannon the full contract price. In 2007, Stock timely filed a lien on the Project and obtained a judgment against Cannon for the amount due under the subcontract. Platte River Insurance Company (“Platte”), the surety, issued a bond to discharge Stock’s lien. Consequently, Stock pursued an action against Platte to collect the judgment in the amount of $93,865.27. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chadd Reynolds, Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Reynolds may be contacted at reynolds@ahclaw.com

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    May 25, 2020 —
    As a result of the COVID-19 (commonly referred to as the Coronavirus) pandemic, remote working arrangements have become the new norm. For those working from home (WFH), the software program “Zoom Meetings,” has found a substantial increase in demand and popularity as a means to facilitate meetings online rather than meeting in person. There are also a number of other similar platforms available for online meetings such as Skype and Teams (from Microsoft), Go to Meeting (from LogMeIn) and WebEx Meetings (Cisco). Best Practices for Businesses - Privacy and Security Protocols With these platforms becoming a necessity for businesses, there are a number of best practices that should be considered to safely conduct online meetings and teleconferences as well as protect information. These include the following:
    1. Upgrade to the most recent version of the program or application;
    2. Use passwords, especially with recurring meetings;
    3. Protect all passwords as well as personal meeting identifiers used in Zoom and other platforms;
    4. Carefully moderate meetings and ask meeting attendees to identify themselves at the beginning of a meeting;
    5. Consider allowing only authenticated users to participate in meetings;
    6. Use the Waiting Rooms feature in Zoom; and
    7. Enable features available only to meeting hosts.
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion and Joshua Anderson, Newmeyer Dillion Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com Mr. Anderson may be contacted at joshua.anderson@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    March 01, 2017 —
    A re-booted construction defects reform bill recently passed its first Senate committee, according to the Denver Business Journal. Next, Senate Bill 156, sponsored by Sen. Owen Hill, R-Colorado Springs, heads to the Senate floor for debate. SB 156 “would require that condominium owners alleging construction defects take their disputes to arbitration or mediation if requested by builders,” the Denver Business Journal reported. “It also would require that homeowners be informed of the consequences of filing legal actions over purported disputes and that a majority of all owners in a condominium complex vote to proceed with legal action, rather than just a majority of homeowners association board members.” However, it is almost identical to the failed measures that were introduced in 2014 and 2015. Homeowners association group members and owners of defective condominiums argued against the measure, stating “that the effort would not improve the quality of building in the state, but simply would block aggrieved Coloradans from taking their complaints before a jury of their peers.” Proponent of the bill, Tom Clark, CEO of Metro Denver Economic Development Corp., said “that Denver’s housing costs have risen since the first bill was introduced in 2013 to the sixth-most-expensive in the country – and are tops for any metro area not on a coast.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Job is Substantially Complete, the Subcontract was Never Signed, the Subcontractor Wants to be Paid—Now What?

    July 28, 2016 —
    A recent case in North Carolina illustrates the types of problems created when a general contractor accepts a subcontractor’s bid and then allows the subcontractor to perform the work without obtaining a signed subcontract.[i] In this case, the general contractor (Choate Construction Company – “Choate”) accepted a bid from a foundation subcontractor (Southeast Caissons, LLC – “SEC”). Choate sent the subcontract to SEC. SEC provided its changes in a “Proposed Addendum” to the subcontract stating, “[SEC] hereby accepts the terms of the attached Subcontract, subject to and conditioned upon Choate[’s] acceptance of the terms set forth in this Addendum[.]” After that, Choate called SEC and exchanged emails concerning the subcontract terms, but did not reach an agreement. SEC then performed its subcontract and sought payment, and acknowledged it had not signed the subcontract. Choate agreed it owed SEC something, but refused to pay because SEC did not have a signed subcontract, asserting the subcontract was not binding on Choate. 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

    The Contractor’s Contingency: What Contractors and Construction Managers Need to Know and Be Wary Of

    December 04, 2023 —
    Contractors and construction managers who enter into cost reimbursable contracts subject to a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) are responsible for all project costs exceeding the GMP. For this reason, it is imperative that contractors negotiate and incorporate into the GMP a financial buffer that accounts for the unanticipated project costs that are not reimbursable as change orders or costs of the work. This is where the contractor’s contingency comes into play.[1] The contractor’s contingency is a vehicle that allows contractors to mitigate some of the risks inherent in GMP contracts. When drafted properly, a contingency clause allows the contractor and only the contractor to access funds set aside by the owner to address unpredictable or unknown project costs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Skyler L. Santomartino, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Santomartino may be contacted at ssantomartino@pecklaw.com