BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architectural expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractor
    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


    Jobs Machine in U.S. Created More Than Burger Flippers Last Year

    ARUP, Rethinking Green Infrastructure

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Charles Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    Labor Shortage Confirmed Through AGC Poll

    Ninth Circuit Issues Pro-Contractor Licensing Ruling

    Ex-San Francisco DPW Director Sentenced to Seven Years in Corruption Case

    Building in the Age of Technology: Improving Profitability and Jobsite Safety

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    Condominium Association Responsibility to Resolve Construction Defect Claims

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Meet the Forum's In-House Counsel: KATE GOLDEN

    Evacuations in Santa Barbara County as more Mudslides are Predicted

    Reminder: The Devil is in the Mechanic’s Lien Details

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    What Cal/OSHA’s “Permanent” COVID Standards Mean for Employers

    “Unwinnable”: Newark Trial Team Obtains Unanimous “No Cause” Verdict in Challenging Matter on Behalf of NYC Mutual Housing Association

    “Bee” Careful: Unique Considerations When Negotiating a Bee Storage Lease Agreement

    Virginia Chinese Drywall and pollution exclusion

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Is Construction Heading Off the Fiscal Cliff?

    BHA Expands Construction Experts Group

    Waiver of Subrogation Enforced, Denying Insurers Recovery Against Additional Insured in $500 Million Off-Shore Oil Rig Loss

    Economic Loss Doctrine Bars Negligence Claim Against Building Company Owner, Individually

    Inability to Confirm Coverage Supports Setting Aside Insured’s Default Judgment on Grounds of Extrinsic Mistake

    University of California Earthquake Report Provides List of Old Concrete Buildings in LA

    Nondelegable Duties

    Court Finds No Coverage for Workplace “Prank” With Nail Gun

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    Party Cannot Skirt Out of the Very Fraud It Perpetrates

    Tokyo Building Flaws May Open Pandora's Box for Asahi Kasei

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Partner John Van Vlear Named to Board Of Groundwater Resources Association Of California

    FEMA Administrator Slams Failures to Prepare, Evacuate Before Storms

    A Top U.S. Seller of Carbon Offsets Starts Investigating Its Own Projects

    Celebrating Excellence: Lisa Bondy Dunn named by Law Week Colorado as the 2024 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Buildings Don't Have To Be Bird-Killers

    Rattlesnake Bite Triggers Potential Liability for Walmart

    Los Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal Fight

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

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

    Federal Court Ruling Bolsters the “Your Work” Exclusion in Standard CGL Policies

    Notice of Claim Sufficient to Invoke Coverage

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    Business Risk Exclusions (j) 5 and (j) 6 Found Ambiguous

    New Orleans Is Auctioning Off Vacant Lots Online

    Related’s $1 Billion Los Angeles Project Opens After 15-Year Wait

    HOA Has No Claim to Extend Statute of Limitations in Construction Defect Case

    Corps Releases Final Report on $29B Texas Gulf Coast Hurricane Defense Plan
    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

    Contract Change #1- Insurance in the A201 (law note)

    April 11, 2018 —
    Insurance– everyone needs it; everyone would just as soon not have to deal with it. I get it, I do. Attorneys, Insurance Agents– no one likes spending time with those folk! Good news though. The changes to the A201 mean that you may end up spending less time with both! The most important change to the Insurance requirements of the AIA contract is that most of it has moved to a new Exhibit. Why is this important? Instead of having to send the entire contract to your agent or broker, you can now send them only the section that they really need to review for compliance. This also means that if insurance policies change (as they surely will), the entire contract document does not need to be re-written– the Exhibit can be updated accordingly, leaving the rest of the A201 alone. Nice, right? This change was made to streamline insurance review and provide for that flexibility of the changing insurance market. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Google’s Biggest Moonshot Is Its Search for a Carbon-Free Future

    November 15, 2021 —
    Google Bay View, the company’s newest campus, consists of three squat buildings nestled near the San Francisco Bay shoreline a few miles east of its headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. The first things visitors notice are the roofs. They curve down gently from pinched peaks, like circus tents, sloping almost to the ground. Each roof is blanketed with overlapping solar panels that glisten with a brushed metal sheen on the edges. Google calls this design Dragonscale, and indeed it looks as if a mystical beast is curled up by the water in Silicon Valley. Google envisions its latest campus as the embodiment of a grander ambition to run its operations entirely free of carbon. The company plans to open Bay View in January to “a limited number” of employees, depending on the pandemic. Beneath the buildings, thousands of concrete pillars plunged into the ground will serve as a sort of geothermal battery, storing heat to warm the building and water supply without natural gas. The roof panels were constructed with a unique textured glass to prevent glare and with canopies that emit a soft, glowing light into the spacious atria inside. “We call this the Cathedral of Work,” says Asim Tahir, who oversees energy decisions in Google’s real estate division. He stands by the southern entrance in a hard hat, mask, and safety vest. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Bergen, Bloomberg

    What Makes Building Ventilation Good Enough to Withstand a Pandemic?

    January 11, 2021 —
    In October, students at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, held an intimate jazz concert at a bar downtown, with an audience of about 20 peers and faculty members — all of whom held digital passes indicating they’d recently tested negative for Covid-19. Two jazz ensembles performed, sometimes with masks and coverings for their instruments, and other times without. Behind the scenes, mechanical engineering professor Ty Newell tinkered with the airflow, turning the exhaust and recirculation fans on and off at different points during the night. His students monitored for changes in the air quality, using a special instrument to measure the concentrations of carbon dioxide and fine particulate matter, both key to determining if a building is well ventilated. The experiment sought to highlight the significance of proper ventilation, something that Newell said hadn’t been paid enough attention, until now. As evidence suggesting Covid-19 can spread through aerosol transmission continues to mount, health experts are focused less on sanitizing surfaces and more on improving indoor air quality. In December, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention finally put out its ventilation recommendations to combat Covid-19, based on standards set by ASHRAE, or the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Linda Poon, Bloomberg

    Insurer Prohibited from Bringing Separate Contribution Action in Subrogation to Rights of Suspended Insured

    January 15, 2019 —
    In Travelers Property Casualty Co. of Amer. v. Engel Insulation, Inc. (No. C085753, filed 11/30/18), a California appeals court held that an insurer may not file its own action to assert claims solely as a subrogee of a suspended corporation, where the corporation could not otherwise assert the claims on its own behalf. In Engel, a homeowners association filed a construction defect action against the developer, Westlake. Travelers defended Westlake as an additional insured on the policy of a subcontractor. After the case settled, Travelers brought a subrogation action against another subcontractor for contribution to the defense costs. However, Westlake had its corporate status suspended for failure to pay taxes, and the subcontractor moved for judgment on the pleadings, which was granted. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    July 01, 2019 —
    Can an employer recover liquidated damages (LDs) from a contractor if the contract terminates before the contractor completes the work? Surprisingly, heretofore, English law provided no clear answer to this seemingly straightforward question, and inconsistent case law over the past century has left a trail of confusion. Given the widespread use of English law in international construction contracts, this uncertainty had gone on far too long. The good news is that drafters of construction contracts throughout the world can now have a well-deserved good night’s sleep courtesy of the English Court of Appeal’s March 2019 decision in Triple Point Technology, Inc. v PTT Public Company Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 230. The Triple Point case concerned the delayed supply by Triple Point (the “Contractor”) of a new software system to employer PTT. The contract provided for payments upon achievement of milestones, however order forms incorporated into the contract set out the calendar dates on which fixed amounts were payable by PTT, resulting in an apparently contradictory requirements on when payment was due. Triple Point achieved completion (149 days late) of a portion of the work milestones, and were paid for that work. Triple Point then sought payment for the work which was not yet completed, relying on the calendar dates in the order forms rather than achievement of milestone payments. Things got progressively worse as PTT refused payment, Triple Point suspended the work for PTT’s failure to pay, PTT terminated the contract and then appointed a new contractor to complete the work. Reprinted courtesy of Vincent C. Zabielski, Pillsbury and Julia Kalinina Belcher, Pillsbury Mr. Zabielski may be contacted at vincent.zabielski@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Belcher may be contacted at julia.belcher@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Plan Submitted for Explosive Demolition of Old Tappan Zee Bridge

    December 19, 2018 —
    Worker safety concerns sparked a new plan on how to demolish the remnants of the old Tappan Zee Bridge in New York. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Eydie Cubarrubia, ENR
    Ms. Cubarrubia may be contacted at cubarrubiae@enr.com

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

    December 02, 2015 —
    A recent case out of New Mexico highlights the importance for subcontractors to review their contract with the general and the contract between the general and the owner. In Centex/Worthgroup, LLC v. Worthgroup Architects, L.P, the architect claimed that the limitation of liability clause in the prime contract trumped the provisions of the subcontract. The court disagreed and ruled that the specific provision in the subcontract controlled. In the case, a general contractor was hired to expand and renovate a resort. The general contractor subcontracted with an architect to design a mechanically stabilized earth wall. The prime contract contained a limitation of liability clause that states:
    general contractor shall require its design professional Subcontractor(s) to obtain insurance in an amount not less than $3,000,000. Owner agrees that it will limit general contractor’s liability to Owner for any errors or omissions in the design of the Project to whatever sums Owner is able to collect from the above described professional errors and omissions insurance carrier.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    September 09, 2011 —

    A summary judgment was affirmed in the case of Brown v. Farmers Group, by the California Court of Appeals. The Browns bought a new home in Oakley, California. At the time, they signed disclosure statement “acknowledging that the area around their home experienced gusty winds and would be in development for years to come, which might result in dust and airborne mold.”

    The Browns found an unusual amount of dust in their home, which became worse when they ran their heating and air conditioning system. Shelia Brown was later diagnosed with chronic valley fever, which was attributed to airborne mold. The Browns contacted Farmers which investigated the house. Although the adjustor from Farmers said the Browns would be covered, Farmers denied the claim.

    After the Browns moved out of the house, an inspector found that the HVAC line in the attic was disconnected, sending dust into the home. The Browns brought action against Mid-Century Insurance, which managed the policy, and Farmers. The identified the HVAC defect, window problems, and valley fever as causes, suing for breach of contact, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    The court rejected all these claims. The policy with Farmers excluded losses due to defective construction. This ruled out the faulty HVAC system and any problems there might have been from the windows. The policy also specifically excluded losses from contamination, fungi, pathogens, and noxious substances. The court further found that the adjustor’s opinion was irrelevant to the question of what the policy actually covered. Finally, the court found no evidence of intentional infliction of emotional stress.

    On review, the appeals court upheld the trial court’s conclusions and affirmed the summary judgment.

    Read the court’s decision…

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