BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildingsFairfield Connecticut construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut architect 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


    What Is a Construction Defect in California?

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Couple Sues for Construction Defects in Manufactured Home

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    California Trial Court Clarifies Application of SB800 Roofing Standards and Expert’s Opinions

    Assignment of Insured's Policy Ineffective

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Washington Court Tunnels Deeper Into the Discovery Rule

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    Construction Defect Claim Not Timely Filed

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    California Indemnity and Defense Construction Law Changes for 2013

    You’ve Been Suspended – Were You Ready?

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Michigan Claims Engineers’ Errors Prolonged Corrosion

    Blackstone to Buy Apartments From Greystar in $2 Billion Deal

    Minneapolis Condo Shortage Blamed on Construction Defect Law

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    You Are Your Brother’s Keeper. Direct Contractors in California Now Responsible for Wage Obligations of Subcontractors

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 2 – Procedural Due Process

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    Revised Cause Identified for London's Wobbling Millennium Bridge After Two Decades

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Construction Termination Issues for the Architect and Engineer: Part 1– Introduction to the Series

    Court Holds That Trimming of Neighbor’s Trees is Not an Insured Accident or Occurrence

    Home Building Up in Kansas City

    War-Torn Ukraine Looks to Europe’s Green Plans for Reconstruction Ideas

    How to Make the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive

    Collapse Claim Dismissed

    Uniform Rules Governing New York’s Supreme and County Courts Get An Overhaul

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    Justice Dept., EPA Ramp Up Environmental Justice Enforcement

    Louisiana District Court Declines to Apply Total Pollution Exclusion

    FEMA Fire Management Assistance Granted for the French Fire

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    Federal Court Enforces “Limits” and “Most We Will Pay” Clauses in Additional Insured Endorsement

    After 15 Years, Settlement Arrested at San Francisco's Millennium Tower

    Blackstone to Buy Cosmopolitan Resort for $1.73 Billion

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    Effective October 1, 2019, Florida General Contractors Have a Statutory Right to Recovery of Attorney Fees Against a Defaulted Subcontractor’s Surety

    DoD Will Require New Cybersecurity Standards in 2020: Could Other Agencies Be Next?

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    MTA Debarment Update

    Homeowner Sues Brick Manufacturer for Spalling Bricks

    Determination That Title Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith Vacated and Remanded
    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

    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    February 07, 2013 —
    The ability to sue over construction defects has typically been limited to the initial purchaser of a home. But as Kevin F. McKeegan writes in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently expanded that to subsequent purchasers. As Mr. Keegan notes, "not only can the first buyer of a new home bring a lawsuit against a builder, but now any subsequent buyer within 12 years of the home's construction can file a claim." Mr. Keegan, a lawyer with Meyer, Unkovic & Scott, notes that in the underlying case, the second owners of a home in Jamison, Pennsylvania filed a claim that the water infiltration violated the "implied warranty of habitability." There are still limitations on construction defects in Pennsylvania. The suit must be filed within twelve years of completion of the construction, and a breach of implied warranty must be proven. Mr. Keegan notes that "the homeowner must show that a defect is hidden and non-obvious, that it is the result of the builder's design or construction, and that it affects the habitability of the residence." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    August 19, 2024 —
    The federal district court, interpreting Massachusetts law, found there were genuine issues of fact as to whether the insured's mixing of biodiesel with home heating fuel was an occurrence. United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Peterson's Oil Serv., Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106980 (D. Mass. June 17, 2024). Homeowners sued Peterson's Oil Service, alleging that Peterson sold them fuel for home heating which contained more that 5% biodiesel. The homeowners further alleged that fuel containing more than 5% biodiesel did not meet industry standards and caued damage to their home heating equipment. Peterson allegedly did not fully disclose the presence of biodiesel in their fuel, despite knowing the risk posed by high-biodiesel blended fuel. The insurers, United States Fire Insurance Company and The North River Insurance Company, defended Peterson under a reservation of rights. United States Fire issued priomary policies with limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 as a general aggregate limit. An endorsement titled "Limited Coverage - Failure to Supply" limited the amount covered for "property damage arising out of the failure of any insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam" to $250,000. North River issued umbrella policies with additional coverage in the amount of $15,000,000 per occurrnce and in the aggregate if property damage was caused by an occurrence. The umbrella policies also contained a "Failure to Supply Exclusion" which excluded coverage for "property damage arising out of the failure of an insured to adequately supply gas, oil, water, electricty or steam." 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

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    October 22, 2013 —
    The State of Florida has frozen the assets of Nationwide Pools over claims of deceptive practices. Nationwide will be allowed to engage in pool construction during the lawsuit. The Florida Attorney General’s office alleges that Nationwide Pools failed to pay subcontractors, misrepresented warranties, and left customers with unfinished pools. The State of Florida is seeking restitution to consumers who did business with Nationwide Pools. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    August 29, 2022 —
    After more than six months of scrutiny, San Francisco’s Department of Building Inspection has issued a revised building permit for the revamped perimeter pile upgrade of the settling 645-ft-tall Millennium Tower, thanks to a determination from the planning department that the revised scheme would not have any negative environmental impacts. The upgrade now consists of 18 piles to bedrock, already installed, rather than 52. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    2021 Executive Insights: Leaders in Construction Law

    August 16, 2021 —
    Gregory Cokinos, President and CEO, Cokinos | Young First, experience in the construction industry is of primary importance and vital to successfully negotiating construction contracts and handling construction claims and disputes. Even a mildly complex construction dispute is more than most non-construction lawyers can properly handle. Issues concerning scheduling, productivity, change management and risk shifting (among many others) are complex and unique to construction and can be further complicated by the procedural and substantive law that differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Second, it is essential that your law firm has a culture of representing construction professionals. Understanding construction nomenclature and how construction projects are staffed, organized and documented saves time and money in an already expensive and time-consuming process. You cannot overstate the advantage of shared resources within an established construction firm when evaluating and handling construction matters. A law firm that dedicates a significant portion of its practice to the construction industry is uniquely positioned to realize this advantage. Finally, as I tell our young lawyers, “success” only comes before “work” in the dictionary. Hard work is the key to successfully negotiating a contract or executing a litigation plan in this complex industry. So, look for a firm that is not afraid of working long days and weekends to achieve success. Reprinted courtesy of Donald Berry, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

    August 28, 2018 —
    With construction ramping up in many markets, construction firms plan to hire more workers, indicating the industry's continued optimism about a healthy economy. It's news that is both exciting and perhaps a little daunting: hiring competent, qualified tradespeople is challenging under any conditions. No one wants to hire a poor employee—or worse, someone who turns out to be a thief. While no industry is immune to occupational fraud, the construction industry is one of the harder hit. The average construction fraud scheme costs business owners $227,000 before it is detected. Worse, the fraudster is very often someone the employer implicitly trusts, making it even harder to believe the company has been the victim of insider theft. Fraud can hurt a business's reputation, cost thousands and betray trust. It may seem uncontrollable and unforeseeable unless employers know how to detect and deter fraudulent behavior. Reprinted courtesy of Tiffany Couch, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Ms. Couch may be contacted at tcouch@acuityforensics.com

    Insurer Must Defend and Indemnify Construction Defect Claims Under Iowa Law

    February 23, 2017 —
    Applying Iowa law, the federal district court found that the insurer had to defend and indemnify construction defect claims for damage to property caused by the insured's subcontractors. Van Der Weide v. Cincinnati Ins., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4469 (N.D. Iowa Jan. 12, 2017). Van Der Weide contracted with Bouma & Company, Inc. to construct a house in 1996. Before construction began, Bouma purchased a CGL policy and a separate umbrella policy from Cincinnati, which were in effect from January 30, 1996 to January 30, 1999. Bouma used various subcontractors to build the home, including Elkato Masonry, which did the brick veneer and masonry work. The house was completed in February 1998 and Van Der Weide moved in during August 1998. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    The Pandemic, Proposed Federal Privacy Regulation and the CCPA

    November 02, 2020 —
    The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation met recently to discuss considerations for implementing federal privacy laws. Not surprisingly, the main impetus to reevaluate a federal framework is the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic with the greatly increased reliance on online working and school arrangements, as well as the need to share personal information for contact tracing and other efforts to weaken the pandemic. While federal regulation of personal information has been proposed in the past, there are a few key issues that still remain unresolved. One is enforcement of the regulations. The issue is whether enforcement should be handled by the Federal Trade Commission or if the establishment of a new federal authority is needed to enforce privacy requirement violations. Other key outstanding issues include pre-emption of state rights and whether any regulations should include a private right of action. Given that the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) is the most stringent state regulation addressing data privacy in the United States, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra participated as a witness in the recent Senate Hearing. He shared his opinions as to both federal pre-emption and the need for a private right of action. He recommended that the committee preclude federal regulation from pre-empting state laws, including the CCPA. He noted that individual states are in a better position to adapt and keep up with technological innovation, and that some states have also already implemented thorough privacy protections, such as Mississippi and Washington. With respect to the private right of action, he admitted his office can only do so much to enforce these regulations amongst California’s huge population of businesses and residents. His belief is that individual consumers need the ability to pursue their own remedies in court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com