BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failure
    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


    Finding Plaintiff Intentionally Spoliated Evidence, the Northern District of Indiana Imposes Sanction

    The Partial Building Collapse of the 12-Story Florida Condo

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Housing Markets Continue to Improve

    Appeals Court Finds Manuscript Additional Insured Endorsements Ambiguous Regarding Completed Operations Coverage for Additional Insured

    WATCH: 2023 Construction Economic Update and Forecast

    The General Assembly Adds Some Clarity to Contracts and Unlicensed Contractors

    Walmart Seeks Silicon Valley Vibe for New Arkansas Headquarters

    Homebuilders Go Green in Response to Homebuyer Demand

    With Historic Removal of Four Dams, Klamath River Flows Again Unhindered

    LAX Runway Lawsuit a Year Too Late?

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Interpreting Insurance Coverage and Exclusions: When Sudden means Sudden and EIFS means Faulty

    A Year Later, Homeowners Still Repairing Damage from Sandy

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Coronavirus Is Starting to Slow the Solar Energy Revolution

    Construction Defects Survey Results Show that Warranty Laws Should be Strengthened for Homeowners & Condominium Associations

    Lane Construction Sues JV Partner Skanska Over Orlando I-4 Project

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Depreciating Labor Costs May be Factor in Actual Cash Value

    Condo Buyers Seek to Void Sale over Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Extreme Flooding Overwhelms New York Roadways, Killing 1 Person

    Falls Requiring Time Off from Work are Increasing

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/30/22) – Proptech Trends, Green Construction, and Sustainable Buildings

    Hunton Insurance Team Wins Summary Judgment on Firm’s Own Hurricane Harvey Business Income Loss

    JPMorgan Blamed for ‘Zombie’ Properties in Miami Lawsuit

    John O’Meara is Selected as America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators

    Lack of Workers Holding Back Building

    Review the Terms and Conditions of Purchase Orders- They Could be Important!

    Second Month of US Construction Spending Down

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    Texas Court Requires Insurer to Defend GC Despite Breach of Contract Exclusion

    Revised Federal Rule Regarding Class-Wide Settlements

    Big Data Meets Big Green: Data Centers and Carbon Removal Compete for Zero-Emission Energy

    U.S. Codes for Deck Attachment

    North Carolina Exclusion j(6) “That Particular Part”

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    Lack of Flood Insurance for New York’s Poorest Residents

    Wyncrest Commons: Commonly Used Progress Payments in Construction Contracts Do Not Render Them Installment Contracts

    What I Love and Hate About Updating My Contracts From an Owners’ Perspective

    Case Remanded for Application of Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    Are You a Construction Lienor?

    West Coast Casualty’s Quarter Century of Service

    ASCE Statement on Congress Passage of WRDA 2024

    Denver Airport Terminates P3 Contract For Main Terminal Renovation

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    A Win for Policyholders: Court Finds Flood Exclusion Inapplicable to Plumbing Leaks Caused by Hurricane Rainfall
    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. Leveraging 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

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    July 14, 2016 —
    Ahlers & Cressman PLLC attorneys have again been recognized as “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars” (attorneys under 40 years of age, or practicing under 10 years) in Washington for 2016. Six Ahlers & Cressman attorneys were recognized as Super Lawyers: John P. Ahlers, Paul R. Cressman, Jr., Scott R. Sleight, Bruce A. Cohen, Lawrence S. Glosser, and Brett M. Hill. Additionally, three of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized as Rising Stars: Ryan W. Sternoff, James R. Lynch, and Lindsay K. Taft. Super Lawyers selects attorneys using a multiphase selection process, involving peer nominations, evaluations, and third-party research. Each attorney candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only five percent of the total lawyers in Washington State are selected for the honor of Super Lawyer, and no more than 2.5 percent are selected for the honor of Rising Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Beyond the Flow-Down Clause: Subcontract Provisions That Can Expose General Contractors to Increased Liability and Inconsistent Outcomes

    December 10, 2024 —
    Flow-down clauses in construction subcontracts—blanket clauses providing that some or all of the terms and conditions in the prime contract between the general contractor and the property owner apply equally between the subcontractor and general contractor—are an important component to managing risk for a general contractor and reducing the likelihood of disputes with either/both the owner and subcontractor. Put simply, flow-down provisions can provide continuity between the general contractor’s obligations to the owner and the subcontractor’s obligations to the general contractor. Properly drafted, flow-down clauses reduce the general contractor’s risk by ensuring that the subcontractor is legally bound to meet the owner’s objectives for the project in the same way as the general contractor. But relying on blanket flow-down clauses, alone, to protect the general contractor is like a soldier going into battle with nothing but a helmet, leaving significant other areas exposed and unprotected. In other words, a general contractor should look beyond just a singular, blanket flow down of terms to ensure its bases are properly covered. Accordingly, this article goes beyond the blanket flow-down clause and highlights several key subcontract provisions where inconsistent obligations among the subcontractor, general contractor, and owner expose the general contractor to increased liability and inconsistent outcomes. Specifically, this article will examine disputes resolution clauses, liquidating provisions, notice provisions, and termination provisions. However, this article will not provide a deep examination of these clauses, nor does it highlight every potentially relevant clause. Rather, it focuses on these select clauses to highlight important issues associated with flow-down provisions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Phillip L. Parham III, Jones Walker LLP
    Mr. Parham may be contacted at pparham@joneswalker.com

    Were Condos a Bad Idea?

    June 13, 2022 —
    Introduction Condominiums are a nice idea, but their execution has been less than perfect. Long before the fatal Berkeley, California balcony failure in 2015 or the 2021 Champlain Towers South collapse that killed 98 people in Surfside, Florida, we suspected that all was not right with the basic condo concept. Years ago, there were already signs this "cooperative" housing model was anything but. Whether due to owner apathy, internal disputes, or failure to fund future repairs, sustaining these projects for the long-term has been difficult, leaving their future in doubt. Can this be fixed, or is the concept inherently flawed? Every enterprise has an organizational "model" to run the business. For-profit corporations obtain revenue from the sale of products or services. The revenue of non-profit condominium corporations are the assessments paid by the owners of the individual units. While these assessments are “mandatory” in the sense they must be paid, they are also “voluntary” since the amount is left to the board of directors to determine. Condos are cheaper to buy, but the sales price may not reflect the real cost of ownership. They are "cooperative" because costs and space are shared, but internal disputes and funding shortfalls operate to shorten the life of these buildings in ways few owners understand. Internal Disputes Why is condominium life frequently not “cooperative?” Disputes. Disputes between condominium owners and their associations; among board members; and between individual owners and their neighbors. There are arguments over the right to put a flag on the balcony. There are arguments over swimming pool hours. The right to paint their front door some color other than everyone else's. The right to be free of noise, smoke, or view-blocking plants. And sometimes, the claimed right not to pay assessments needed to maintain the project—all notwithstanding the governing documents to the contrary. The right to use one's property as the owner sees fit is a concept imported from the single-family home experience but not replicated in condominiums where common ownership requires rules to avoid chaos. But a condominium association's most important concern should not be the color of someone's front door or when they can swim but sustaining the building and keeping owners safe. Maybe we care someone has painted their front door bright green, but should that concern have priority over finding rot that may cause a balcony to collapse with someone on it? Resolving conflicts and enforcing the governing documents have a reasonable success rate. Still, the effort required to do that often distracts the board from more critical issues—damage that can sink the ship. Directors can waste a lot of time re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when, if they look closely, the iceberg is coming. Maintenance Lacks Priority Why can't we enforce the rules and do what’s necessary to sustain the building and keep occupants safe? Unfortunately, juggling both behavioral and sustainability issues has proven difficult for many volunteer boards of directors. Rule disputes are always in their face, crowding their agenda, while the damage that could lead to structural failure often remains unknown. Also, enforcing—or resisting—rules can involve a clash of egos that keep those matters front and center. Or, and I suspect this is a primary culprit, the cost of adequate inspections, maintenance, and repair is so high that boards cannot overcome owner resistance to that expense. While boards and management must sustain the project and protect people, raising the funds to do that is another matter. Directors must leap hurdles to increase regular assessments. Imposing large, unexpected, special assessments for major repairs can be political suicide. Unfortunately, few owners realize how deadly serious proper maintenance is until there is a Berkeley or a Surfside, and everyone is stunned by the loss of life and property. While those are extreme cases of faulty construction, inadequate maintenance, natural causes, or all the above, they will not be the last. We know that because experts have seen precursors to those same conditions in other projects. Our concern for sustainability arises from examining newer projects during construction defect litigation when forensic experts open walls to inspect waterproofing and structural components. It also comes from helping our clients with the re-construction of older buildings and dealing with many years or decades of neglect for which little or no reserves have been allocated. The economic impact of repairing long-term damage is huge. Rot lying hidden within walls slowly damages the structural framing. Moisture seeping into balcony supports weakens them sometimes to the point of collapse. The cost to repair this damage is frequently out of reach of most condominium associations. In newer projects, when experts find problems early, claims are possible. The Berkeley balcony failure occurred in an eight-year-old building[1], and there was recourse available from the builder. But with older projects, it is often difficult to hold anyone responsible other than the owners themselves. Is The Condo Model Flawed? Suppose this is true—and our experience representing condominium projects for over forty years tells us it is—then we are not dealing only with the inexperience of some volunteer directors but rather with a flawed organization model. Board members want to succeed but are constrained by an income stream that depends almost entirely on the will of the individual owners—essentially voluntary funding. Under most state laws, funding for condominium operations and maintenance is not mandatory[2], and relies instead on the willingness of the directors to assess owners for whatever is needed, and on the willingness of owners to accept the board’s decisions. When a board of directors can set assessments at whatever level is politically comfortable, without adequate consideration, or even knowledge, of long-term maintenance needs, systemic underfunding can result[3]. What the members want are the lowest assessments possible, and directors often accede to those demands. When these factors conspire to underfund maintenance, they will drastically shorten the service life of a building. They also make it potentially unsafe. Commercial buildings incentivize their owners for good maintenance with increased rents and market value. That incentive is not relevant to a condominium owner because the accumulating deficit is rarely understood at the time of sale and not reflected in the unit’s sales price. With a single-family home, deferred maintenance is more easily identified and is reflected in the purchase price. But condo home inspections are usually confined to the interior of a unit, and do not assess the overall condition of the entire building or project or review any deficit in the funding needed to attend to deficiencies. Thus, market value is not affected by reality. In most states that require that reserves be maintained for future maintenance and repairs, the statutes require nothing other than cursory surface inspections. Damage beneath the skin of a building is not investigated, and no reserves are recommended for what is not known. California recently enacted legislation that will require condominium associations inspect specific elevated structures for safety, including intrusive testing where indicated. But no other state requires this level of inspection, and few even require a reserve study to determine how much money to save for the obvious problems, never mind those no one knows about[4]. This situation leads to unfair consequences for those owners who find themselves unlucky enough to own a unit when the damage and deficits are finally realized. Damage discovered, say, in year 35 didn’t just happen in year 35. That deterioration likely began earlier in the building's life and lay hidden for decades. It is costly to repair when it finally becomes obvious or dangerous. No prior owner, those who owned and sold their units years ago, will pay any part of the cost of the eventual rehabilitation of that building due to past lack of adequate inspections and years of artificially low assessments. Instead, the present owners will be handed the entire tab for the shortfall from several decades of deferred maintenance or hidden damage—the last people standing when the music stops. Can this trend be reversed? As condominium buildings age and deterioration continues, the funding deficit increases dramatically. But to reverse that trend and reduce the deficit, someone must know it exists and be willing to address it. That requires more robust inspections early in the building's life and potentially higher assessments to stay even with any decay. Conclusion It would not be wrong to blame this on the failure of the basic condominium model. Volunteers rarely have sufficient training or expertise to oversee complex infrastructure maintenance, especially without mandatory funding to pay for it. The model also does not insist that board members have a talent for resolving conflicts. While condominium boards can leverage fines or legal action to enforce the rules, that lacks finesse and can create greater antagonism—a distraction from the more critical job of raising funds to inspect and maintain the building. Unit owner-managed, voluntarily funded, multi-million-dollar condominium projects were probably a bad idea from the beginning. But sadly, it is way too late to reverse course on the millions of such projects built in the past sixty years. Many are already reaching the end of their service lives, with no plan to deal with that. Robust inspection standards on new and existing projects and enforceable minimum funding for maintenance and repairs should be considered by state legislatures. But whatever the approach, the present system is not staying even with the deterioration of many buildings, and that is just not safe anymore.
    1. The collapse of the balcony in Berkeley occurred on an apartment building. But the construction of that building is similar or identical to the construction of most multi-story wood-frame condominiums.
    2. Boards of directors are empowered by statute or contract to assess members for operation and maintenance costs. However, there are few statutes that set minimum funding or otherwise require boards to exercise that authority.
    3. Even in states that require reserve studies, the physical inspections are inadequate to uncover some of the costliest damage. California’s reserve study statute—Civil Code Section 5550—only requires inspection of those components that are visible and accessible, leaving damage within walls and other structural components undiscovered and funding for the eventual repairs, unaddressed.
    4. In May 2022, in response to the Champlain Towers South collapse, Florida enacted mandatory structural inspections for buildings 30 years and older, repeating every 10 years thereafter. The law also includes mandatory reserve funding for structural components.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tyler P. Berding, Berding & Weil LLP
    Mr. Berding may be contacted at tberding@berdingweil.com

    What I Love and Hate About Updating My Contracts From an Owners’ Perspective

    July 25, 2022 —
    The Construction Owners Association of America (COAA) is the largest association of construction owners in the United States. COAA just held its Spring Connect conference in downtown Baltimore on the University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB) campus. One session featured “What I Love and Hate About Updating My Contracts from an Owners’ Perspective.” ConsensusDocs’ Executive Director & Senior Counsel Brian Perlberg spoke on a panel with Joe Cleves of Taft Law and Pen Wolf from the Cleveland Clinic. Pen Wolf from Cleveland Clinic outlined the process he used to update his contracts recently. The Cleveland Clinic builds facilities annually and owns different facilities at different locations. The clinic employs over 75,000 employees. For an owner with a broad reach like the Cleveland Clinic, Wolf recommended using outside counsel with construction expertise to update contracts. He concluded that while it was a significant effort, the endeavor to update the Clinic’s contracts was absolutely worth the time commitment and expense. Wolf shared that updating the Clinic’s contracts has generated positive reviews internally and externally. Now their written agreements better reflect their business practices in their construction design and construction program. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of ConsensusDocs

    Orange County Home Builder Dead at 93

    April 25, 2012 —

    Randall E. Presley was a homebuilder in Southern California for more than thirty years, acting as head of Presley Development Company from 1956 until selling the firm to Lyon Homes in 1987. The two companies merged in 1991 as the Presley Cos. Mr. Presley saw the need in the 1950s to provide people in Southern California with low- to medium-priced quality homes.

    His firm built more than 160 communities and was among the ten largest homebuilding firms in the country, expanding beyond California. Mr. Presley was 93 when he succumbed to pneumonia. He is survived by a wife, three children, seven grandchildren, and 11 great-grandchildren.

    Read the full story…

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

    California Makes Big Changes to the Discovery Act

    March 04, 2024 —
    Beginning January of 2024, California amended the Civil Discovery Act to mirror the Federal Rules and require that any party appearing in a civil action to provide initial disclosures to any other party demanding the same. In January of 2024, California amended the Civil Discovery Act, specifically C.C.P. section 2016.090, to affirmatively require that any party appearing in a civil action to provide initial disclosures to any other party demanding the same. In an effort to reflect the Federal Rule 26 disclosure requirements, as many other States have adopted, California will now also mandate (upon demand) that a party produce evidence without an arduous and possibly duplicative effort. In other words, this initial disclosure will require a party making initial disclosures of persons or records to additionally disclose persons or records that are relevant to the subject matter of the action and to disclose information and records regarding insurance policies or contracts that would make a person or insurance company liable to satisfy a judgment. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Power of Workers Compensation Immunity on Construction Project

    November 30, 2017 —
    On construction projects, workers compensation immunity is real and it is powerful. (See also this article.) Workers compensation immunity is why all general contractors should have workers compensation insurance and they should ensure the subcontractors they hire have workers compensation insurance. Workers compensation insurance becomes the exclusive form of liability for an injured worker thereby immunizing an employer (absent an intentional tort, which is very hard to prove as a means to circumvent workers compensation immunity). If a general contractor, with workers compensation insurance, hires a subcontractor without workers compensation insurance, the general contractor’s workers compensation insurance will be responsible in the event an injury occurs to a subcontractor’s employee. The general contractor becomes the statutory employer. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    April 06, 2020 —
    The global effect of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is still unknown, and the progress of many large-scale construction projects has been affected by “Shelter in Place” orders, although some states and localities have classified construction projects as “essential.” Just last Friday, New York shut down all construction, with few exceptions. Several states have enacted gathering bans of all sizes (including Michigan, Oregon, New Mexico, Washington, New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, California) and more people are likely to be quarantined as widespread testing becomes available. These decisions will undoubtedly affect the supply of materials and labor necessary for construction projects. Officials have turned to increasingly disruptive and measures to control the spread of the virus in addition to event prohibitions and school closures, including restricting people to their homes, and closing businesses that are not “essential.” While many companies have adopted mandatory telecommuting, this is an impossibility on the construction sites. Eventually, supply and labor shortages due to governmental restrictions or quarantines will affect the critical path of construction projects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Elizabeth J. Dye, Pillsbury
    Ms. Dye may be contacted at elizabeth.dye@pillsburylaw.com