BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut ada design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction safety expert
    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


    DHS Awards Contracts for Border Wall Prototypes

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Spearin Doctrine 100 Years Old and Still Thriving in the Design-Build Delivery World

    Savannah Homeowners Win Sizable Judgment in Mold Case against HVAC Contractor

    Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC Recognized Among The Top 50 Construction Law FirmsTM of 2023 by Construction Executive

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Construction Defects Are Not An Occurrence Under New York, New Jersey Law

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Adopts New Rule in Breach-of-the-Consent-to-Settle-Clause Cases

    Nevada Senate Minority Leader Confident about Construction Defect Bill

    You're Doing Construction in Russia, Now What?

    KY Mining Accident Not a Covered Occurrence Under Commercial General Liability Policy

    Who is Responsible for Construction Defect Repairs?

    Competent, Substantial Evidence Carries Day in Bench Trial

    Super Lawyers Recognized Five Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Pulte’s Kitchen Innovation Throw Down

    A New Way to Design in 3D – Interview with Pouria Kay of Grib

    Important Environmental Insurance Ruling Issued In Protracted Insurance-Coverage Dispute

    Changes to Va. Code Section 43-13: Another Arrow in a Subcontractor’s Quiver

    These Are the 13 Cities Where Millennials Can't Afford a Home

    Construction Industry Survey Says Optimism Hits All-Time High

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    “Slow and Steady Doesn’t Always Win the Race” – Applicability of a Statute of Repose on Indemnity/Contribution Claims in New Hampshire

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

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

    Understanding Insurance Disputes in Construction Defect Litigation: A Review of Acuity v. Kinsale

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2022 “Atlanta 500” List

    Compliance Doesn’t Pay: Compliance Evidence Inadmissible in Strict Liability Actions

    Colorado Supreme Court Decision Could Tarnish Appraisal Process for Policyholders

    Ninth Circuit Finds No Coverage for Construction Defects Under California Law

    Build, Baby, Build. But Not Like This, Britain.

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    Creating a Custom Home Feature in the Great Outdoors

    New York Establishes a Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    US Supreme Court Orders All Mountain Valley Gas Line Work to Proceed

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    Charles Eppolito Appointed Vice-Chair of the PBA Judicial Evaluation Commission and Receives Prestigious “President’s Award”

    He's the Top U.S. Mortgage Salesman. His Daughter Isn't Buying It

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    Massachusetts SJC Clarifies “Strict Compliance” Standard in Construction Contracts

    Workers on Big California Bridge Tackle Oil Wells, Seismic Issues

    Nomos LLP Partners Recognized in Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    Arbitrator May Use Own Discretion in Consolidating Construction Defect Cases

    Statute of Limitations and Bad Faith Claims: Factors to Consider

    Construction Defects Not Occurrences under Ohio Law

    Selected Environmental Actions Posted on the Fall 2018 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulator Actions
    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

    New Mexico Architect Is Tuned Into His State

    February 08, 2021 —
    For 40-plus years, Van Gilbert has combined his love for the topography, history and culture of New Mexico with an equally passionate dedication to designing not just structures, but buildings that help create communities. Reprinted courtesy of David M. Brown, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is It Time to Get Rid of Retainage?

    June 15, 2020 —
    Many debate the pros, cons and claims of retainage—when one party to a construction contract withholds a percentage (typically 5%-10%) from an otherwise approved contractor pay application, and which typically is not paid until a project is substantially complete. If an owner withholds retainage from a prime contractor, typically the contractor will in turn withhold retainage from its subcontractors. While retainage has been part of the construction industry for decades, its concept, use (and abuse) have been under more discussion during the past 10 years. Based on heavy lobbying from primary subcontractor groups, state legislatures have passed laws to regulate retainage in commercial projects. Lenders have become more careful about loans and are frequently involved in retainage discussions. Bonded projects are subject to criticism when a surety does not step in and, like the mythical insurance company, write a check. Reprinted courtesy of David K. Taylor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at dtaylor@bradley.com

    Illinois Court Addresses Coverage Owed For Subcontractor’s Defective Work

    May 06, 2019 —
    In Acuity Ins. Co. v. 950 W. Huron Condo. Assoc’n, 2019 IL App (1st) 180743, the Illinois Court of Appeals held that a claim against a subcontractor for damage caused to property outside the scope of its work satisfied the insuring agreement of a CGL policy. The condominium association for the building located at 950 West Huron Street in Chicago, Illinois (“the Association”), sued its general contractor and construction manager Belgravia Group, Ltd., and Belgravia Construction Corporation (collectively “Belgravia”). The Association sought to recover for alleged defects from Belgravia’s unworkmanlike construction of the building that permitted water to permeate and cause damage. In the Association’s complaint, it alleged that in June 2002, after the Association took possession of the building but prior to the completion of construction, Belgravia became aware of numerous conditions and defects, including extensive water infiltration of the building. After discussing the issues with Belgravia, the Association claimed that Belgravia retained contractors to provide cosmetic fixes. However, this did not address the problems and defects. The Association alleged that it spent a substantial amount of money to identify and correct the damage and that it would incur additional costs for future repairs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Bassett, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Bassett may be contacted at bbassett@tlsslaw.com

    Legal Disputes Soar as Poor Information Management Impacts the AEC Industry

    July 03, 2022 —
    Managers in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) are facing more disruptive disputes in 2022 compared to last year according to the latest independent research from regulatory compliance company Ideagen. The survey of business leaders from AEC firms in the US and UK revealed that 78% of respondents experienced some kind of dispute in the business, compared to 63% in 2021, with information accessibility and visibility, caused largely by high staff turnover, the main root causes. With the challenges that the industry continues to face following COVID and increasing costs of materials, this is an added but unnecessary challenge facing the industry. Stuart Rowe, Vice President of Collaboration Strategy at Ideagen, whose customers include the US Navy, Gensler, Arup and Ramboll, said: "The working world has continued to change in the last 12 months, which is reflected in the AEC industry's evolving priorities. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a huge shift to remote working which saw an increased need for effective collaboration tools, however, this year is appears that hybrid working is the new normal in the industry. "Four-fifths of the people we spoke to said email is still king for project correspondence. This is a huge concern as most project scope changes reside in email inboxes. Failing to properly manage all information and records also prevents a Golden Thread, or a Single Source of Truth, across projects and businesses." Ideagen undertook the independent survey to support developments to their Mail Manager software, used by 2,500 architecture, engineering and construction firms in 16 countries worldwide. It revealed a number of insights into how the industry is managing changing work patterns. Download the full research here. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract

    August 10, 2021 —
    The venue to file a lawsuit can be an important issue for a variety of reasons, whether for convenience or the prospect of a more favorable outcome. Oftentimes, there is a venue provision in a contract that provides where the exclusive venue for any dispute arising out of the contract must be brought. In a recent case, Southeastern Concrete Constructors, LLC v. Western Surety Company, 2021 WL 2557297 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), dealing with a Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) project, a subcontractor filed suit against the general contractor’s FDOT payment bond issued under Florida Statute s. 337.18. The subcontractor did not file suit against the general contractor. The subcontractor filed suit in Hillsborough County, Florida. However, the subcontract contained a venue provision requiring disputes under the subcontract to be brought in Levy County, Florida. Based on this venue provision in the subcontract, the trial court granted a motion to transfer the venue of the dispute to Levy County. This, however, was reversed on appeal. 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

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Property Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    July 11, 2011 —

    The Illinois Court of Appeals determined the insurer must defend allegations of property damage arising from faulty workmanship. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1443 (Ill. Ct. App. June, 20, 2011).

    Larsen was a subcontractor for Weather-Tite in a condominium building. Weather-Tite installed windows on the project and hired Larsen to apply sealant to the windows. The windows subsequently leaked and caused water damage within the complex.

    The homeowner’s association sued Weather-Tite for breach of express and implied warranties. Weather-Tite filed a third-party complaint against Larsen, seeking contribution and alleging that Larsen was in breach of contract by failing to add Weather-Tite as an additional insured under Larsen’s CGL policy.

    Both Weather-Tite and Larsen tendered to Larsen’s insurer. Both tenders were denied because the insurer contended the complaints alleged only construction defects, and not “property damage” or an “occurrence” within the terms of the policy.

    The insurer filed suit for a declaratory judgment. The trial court granted the insurer’s motion as to Weather-Tite, but granted Larsen’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    May 24, 2021 —
    The recent opinion out of the Eastern District Court of Virginia, Dickson v. Forney Enterprises, Inc., 2021 WL 1536574 (E.D.Virginia 2021), demonstrates that the federal Miller Act is not designed to protect ALL that perform work on a federal construction project. This is because NOT ALL work is covered under the Miller Act. In this case, a professional engineer was subcontracted by a prime contractor to serve on site in a project management / superintendent capacity. The prime contractor’s scope of work was completed by January 31, 2019. However, the prime contractor was still required to inventory certain materials on site, which was performed by the engineer. The engineer claimed it was owed in excess of $400,000 and filed a Miller Act payment bond lawsuit on February 5, 2020 (more than a year after the project was completed). 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

    Required Contract Provisions for Construction Contracts in California

    October 08, 2014 —
    One question I get fairly often when drafting or reviewing construction contracts is what provisions, if any, are required in construction contracts in California. This is, of course, different than what should be included in a construction contract which is a post for another day. So, here you go: Provisions Required in All Construction Contracts There’s only one requirement applicable to all construction contracts in California. And, that is, that you must include your California contractor’s license number if you are performing or bidding on work requiring a license. California Business and Professions Code section 7030.5 requires that licensed contractors include their license number in “(a) all construction contracts; (b) subcontracts and calls for bid; and (c) all forms advertising, as prescribed by the register of contractors, used by such person.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com