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


    Summary Judgment for Insurer Reversed Based on Expert Opinion

    Commerce City Enacts Reform to Increase For-Sale Multifamily Housing

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    Nevada Bill Aims to Reduce Legal Fees For Construction Defect Practitioners

    Part I: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    Hunton Insurance Partner Among Top 250 Women in Litigation

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    Las Vegas Harmon Hotel to be Demolished without Opening

    4 Breakthrough Panama Canal Engineering Innovations

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose at Slower Pace in May

    Court of Appeal Confirms Privette Doctrine as Applied to Passive Conduct of Property Owner

    First Suit Filed for Losses Caused by COVID-19

    Judge Tells DOL to Cork its Pistol as New Overtime Rule is Blocked

    Coverage Exists for Landlord as Additional Insured

    COVID-19 Response: Recent Executive Orders Present Opportunities for Businesses Seeking Regulatory and Enforcement Relief and Expedited Project Development

    Construction Defects Lead to Demolition of Seattle’s 25-story McGuire Apartments Building

    Drywall Originator Hopes to Sell in Asia

    Los Angeles Could Be Devastated by the Next Big Earthquake

    Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Construction Context

    Gru Was Wrong About the Money: Court Concludes that Lender Owes Contractor “Contractually, Factually and Practically”

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Pennsylvania Superior Court Tightens Requirements for Co-Worker Affidavits in Asbestos Cases

    Another Reason to Always Respond (or Hensel Phelps Wins One!)

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    What Sustainable Building Materials Will the Construction Industry Rely on in 2020?

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    MBIA Seeks Data in $1 Billion Credit Suisse Mortgage Suit

    Iowa Apartment Complex Owners Awarded Millions for Building Defects

    What’s the Best Way to “Use” a Construction Attorney?

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    Indemnity Provision Provides Relief to Contractor; Additional Insured Provision Does Not

    BP Is Not an Additional Insured Under Transocean's Policy

    The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

    Additional Insured is Loss Payee after Hurricane Damage

    Colorado Rejects Bill to Shorten Statute of Repose

    "Decay" Found Ambiguous in Collapse Case

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Eleven WSHB Attorneys Honored on List of 2016 Rising Stars

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    It’s Too Late, Lloyd’s: New York Federal Court Finds Insurer Waived Late Notice Defense

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Partner Jeffrey W. Saab and Associate Shanna B. Carter on Obtaining Another Defense Award at Arbitration!

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Confirms Carrier Owes No Duty to Defend Against Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    California Precludes Surety from Asserting Pay-When-Paid Provision as Defense to Payment Bond Claim

    WCC and BHA Raised Thousands for Children’s Cancer Research at 25th West Coast Casualty CD Seminar

    ASCE Statement on Calls to Suspend the Federal Gas Tax

    More Musings on Why I Mediate

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix
    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

    Gatluak Ramdiet Named to The National Black Lawyers’ “Top 40 Under 40” List

    February 20, 2023 —
    New York, N.Y. (February 2, 2023) - New York Associate Gatluak Ramdiet was recently named to The National Black Lawyers (NBL) “Top 40 Under 40” list. The NBL “Top 40 Under 40” recognizes the most talented Black attorneys under the age of 40 who have an outstanding reputation among peers, the judiciary, and the public. The honorees on this list are nominated from leading lawyers, current members, and Executive Committee members. Mr. Ramdiet is a member of Lewis Brisbois' Medical Malpractice, Healthcare, Life Sciences, General Liability, Construction, and Toxic Tort & Environmental Litigation Practices. He represents individual and institutional clients in complex and high exposure claims, with particular experience handling matters involving catastrophic injuries and serious medical conditions. As part of the New York Medical Malpractice team, he regularly represents individual healthcare providers, including physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    Construction Defects could become Issue in Governor’s Race

    October 22, 2014 —
    According to today’s Denver Business Journal, construction defects have emerged as a potential issue in Colorado’s gubernatorial race. During last night’s debate, Republican challenger Bob Beauprez criticized incumbent Democrat John Hickenlooper for failing to help senators with a last-minute push to enact a bill stripping away homeowner protections in construction disputes. Republicans had argued that the bill was needed to appease apartment developers who claim that quality control and insurance costs are too high on condominium projects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, The Witt Law Firm
    Mr. Witt welcomes comments at www.wittlawfirm.net

    Parking Garage Collapse May Be Due to Construction Defect

    November 07, 2012 —
    A parking garage under construction at the Doral campus of Miami Dade College collapsed on October 9. Experts state that the collapse may have been due to errors in the construction process, either in the fabrication of the pre-cast components or in their assembly. The Bradenton Herald quotes Mark Santos, a structural engineer, who “would look at erection procedures – that’s probably the one question to ask first.” During the failure, floors separated from the south wall of the structure. The contractor responsible for the garage, Ajax Building Corp, said there was “no indication of any potential cause.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Professor Stempel's Excpert Testimony for Insurer Excluded

    October 07, 2019 —
    The court denied Daubert motions for several experts with the exception of Professor Stempel's expert testimony opining that the insurer did not act in bad faith Adell Plastics, Inc. v. Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102942 (D. Md. June 19, 2019). A fire demolished several buildings at Adell's facility. Adell was insured under a commercial property policy issued by Mt. Hawley. Mt. Hawley sued Adell, seeking a declaration that it owed no coverage, and requesting recoupment of a substantial advance payment. Adell filed a counterclaim, alleging that Mt. Hawley had breached the policy and had acted with a lack of good faith. Before the court were several pretrial motions, including motions to exclude testimony of eight expert witnesses. The court denied Adell's motion to exclude several experts to be called by Mt. Hawley. The accountant's testimony was relevant. Adell had to prove damages on its breach of contract claim, and the accountant's testimony would aid the jury in evaluating Adell's documentation and calculating documented damages. Mt. Hawley's fire safety expert investigated the Adell fire. Mt. Hawley had shown that his expert opinion would be sufficiently reliable for admissibility. Further, three fire protection engineers offered by Mt. Hawley and two fire protection engineers to be called by Adell were allowed to testify. Each expert based his investigation and conclusions on the standards of fire investigation as set out in the NEPA Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations. This was a fire insurance case, and fire protection engineers would be allowed to testify and illuminate the circumstances of the fire. 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

    How Contractors Can Prevent Fraud in Their Workforce

    August 13, 2019 —
    The word fraud might conjure up images of Wall Street executives led out to police cars in cuffs, or sleazy conmen with slicked-back hair. While these ideas might be popular in movies and TV, and often in the news, many small and large businesses fall victim to fraud. Whether it’s a trusted site manager who needed a little extra cash to cover an unexpected bill or the accountant who’s been on board for years and has been slowly siphoning an extra paycheck through a ghost employee each month, fraud might be hitting businesses without them even knowing it. The construction industry is hardly immune to such schemes. According to the ACFE’s 2018 Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, organizations lose an estimated 5% of their revenue each year to fraud. The median amount lost per instance of fraud was $130,000 across all industries, but fraud cases in the construction industry cost almost twice that much at $227,000 per fraud. They also last longer on average: fraud schemes in the construction industry continue for 24 months before being detected versus the overall median average of 16 months. The more time a scheme continues, the more money is lost for organizations. What types of fraud schemes are most common in the construction industry? The construction industry is more susceptible to certain types of fraud than other industries due to the nature of the work. The companies may be smaller in size leading to fewer resources to combat fraud and more trust among employees. Also, construction companies inherently deal with many vendors, subcontractors, bidding organizations and other various third parties, which can all pose fraud risks. Reprinted courtesy of Sarah Hofmann, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Mechanic’s Lien Law Update: New Law Brings a Little Relief for Subcontractors and a Lot of Relief for Design Professionals

    June 07, 2021 —
    After several recent failed attempts to amend Chapter 53 of the Texas Property Code (the “Texas Mechanic’s Lien Statute”), it appears that long awaited relief may, at least in part, be on the horizon for subcontractors in Texas. Additionally, architects, engineers, and surveyors also appear to be significant benefactors of House Bill 2237 (“HB 2237”). Under existing law, many subcontractors often fail to perfect their mechanic’s liens under the Texas Mechanic’s Lien Statute because of complex notice requirements which must be sent for every month in which labor or material are furnished. And architects, engineers and surveyors currently have no lien rights unless they have a direct contractual relationship with the owner of the project. Effective January 1, 2022, HB 2237 amends the Texas Mechanic’s Lien Statute in several significant respects. Subcontractor Impacts HB 2237 impacts subcontractors in the following ways:
    1. Establishes uniformity in the notice requirements by imposing the same notice obligation on all subcontractors regardless of with whom they have contracted. Rather than sending one notice to the owner and one to the general contractor, the single notice now required must be sent to both simultaneously. Additionally, HB 2237 prescribes the form of the notice to be given under both Section 53.056 (notice of derivative claimant) and 53.057 (notice of contractual retainage).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tracey L. Williams, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Ms. Williams may be contacted at twilliams@pecklaw.com

    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

    Comply with your Insurance Policy's Conditions Precedent (Post-Loss Obligations)

    May 31, 2021 —
    I am of the opinion that if your property insurer requests a sworn proof of loss, furnish one with the assistance of counsel (preferably). Ignoring the insurer’s request or refusing to comply with insurer’s request is NOT value-added; it is simply placing you at a disadvantage based on the insurer’s argument that you, as the insured, materially breached the policy. I generally find no value having to confront this expected argument. Instead, I find value making an effort to comply with post-loss obligations including the insurer’s request to submit a sworn proof of loss. Working with counsel can help you comply with post-loss obligations (conditions precedent) while not weakening the value or merits of your claim. By way of example, in Edwards v. Safepoint Ins. Co., 46 Fla. L. Weekly D1086a (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), the insured did not provide its property insurer with the requested sworn proof of loss. The insurer moved for summary judgment that the insured’s failure to submit the sworn proof of loss was a material breach of the policy that rendered the policy ineffective. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed explaining “[a] total failure to comply with policy provisions made a prerequisite to suit under the policy may constitute a breach precluding recovery from the insurer as a matter of law. If, however, the insured cooperates to some degree or provides an explanation for its noncompliance, a fact question is presented for resolution by a jury.” Edwards, supra, quoting Haiman v. Federal Ins. Co., 798 So.2d 811, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). 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