BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut defective construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    No Jail Time for Disbarred Construction Defect Lawyer

    South Carolina “Your Work” Exclusion, “Get To” Costs

    EPA Issues Interpretive Statement on Application of NPDES Permit System to Releases of Pollutants to Groundwater

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    Insurer Defends Denial in Property Coverage Dispute Involving Marijuana Growing Operations

    CA Supreme Court Rejects Proposed Exceptions to Interim Adverse Judgment Rule Defense to Malicious Prosecution Action

    Few Homes Available to Reno Buyers, Plenty of Commercial Properties

    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    Maryland Finally set to Diagnose an Allocation Method for Progressive Injuries

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Pulte Home Corp. v. CBR Electric, Inc.

    Jury Trials: A COVID Update

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives “Tier 1” Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Subcontractor’s Claim against City Barred by City’s Compliance with Georgia Payment Bond Statute

    UK's Biggest Construction Show Bans 'Promo Girls'

    The Moving Finish Line: Statutes of Limitation and Repose Are Not Always What They Seem

    Midview Board of Education Lawsuit Over Construction Defect Repairs

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Changing Course Midstream Did Not Work in River Dredging Project

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    That’s not the way we’ve always done it! (Why you should update your office practices)

    Effective Strategies for Reinforcing Safety Into Evolving Design Standards

    Tech to Help Contractors Avoid Litigation

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    Missouri Construction Company Sues Carpenter Union for Threatening Behavior

    Public Projects in the Pandemic Pandemonium

    Fed Inflation Goal Is Elusive as U.S. Rents Stabilize: Economy

    Standard For Evaluating Delay – Directly from An Armed Services Board Of Contract Appeal’s Opinion

    Washington School District Sues Construction Company Over Water Pipe Damage

    Quick Note: October 1, 2023 Changes to Florida’s Construction Statutes

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires

    Serving Notice of Nonpayment Under Miller Act

    What Made the Savannah Harbor Upgrade So Complicated?

    Alaska District Court Sets Aside Rulings Under New Administration’s EO 13795

    Congratulations 2020 DE, MA, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    California Supreme Court Rejects Third Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Violation of Prompt Payment Statutes is Not a Breach of Contract. But That’s Not the Most Interesting Part

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    Colorado Drillers Show Sensitive Side to Woo Fracking Foes

    Mass. Gas Leak Follows NTSB Final Report, Call for Reforms

    United States Supreme Court Limits Class Arbitration

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    Four Common Construction Contracts

    Insurer’s Consent Not Needed for Settlement

    Withholding Payment or Having Your Payment Withheld Due to Disputes on Other Projects: Know Your Rights to Offset
    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

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    August 30, 2017 —
    There is no question that organization on the job site can mean the difference between efficient performance and costly errors. A simple mistake can cost a company thousands, which is why details are carefully articulated and supervisors become better scrutinizers than magazine editors. But for some reason, many companies don’t consider managing job site inventory under this same attentive category, or perhaps they don’t know about the technology available to help them do it. Whole Inventory, Big to Small For contractors, keeping track of every piece of material and equipment lowers losses and keeps crews busy. This is especially true for contractors in the trades who often have specialized equipment in inventory such as power supplies, HVAC “smart energy” components or inspection equipment. Once everything is accounted for, the possibility of loss is decreased and there’s a chance to evaluate the use of all materials and equipment. This can show the efficiency of allotted resources. Is there enough equipment on the site to get tasks completed? Is there a need for more? Less? Having excess equipment can sometimes prepare a crew for problem scenarios. But it can also mean the construction company is overpaying for unneeded resources. However, the only way to know is by effectively managing job site inventory. That includes all equipment and materials. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jessica Stark, Construction Informer

    Are Mechanic’s Liens the Be All End All of Construction Collections?

    August 12, 2024 —
    For those of you familiar with Construction Law Musings, you are aware of my affinity and discussion of those powerful but tricky collection tools: mechanic’s liens. You have heard me tout their ability to secure payment when a contractor or subcontractor has not been paid on a construction project (even in the face of bankruptcy). If you read my construction law blog regularly (though recently not-so-regularly updated), you could get the impression that a mechanic’s lien is an automatic avenue to payment. While mechanic’s liens can be a powerful collection tool, this post is going to discuss some pros and cons of recording, and ultimately suing to enforce, a mechanic’s lien in Virginia. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    California MCLE Seminar at BHA Sacramento July 11th

    June 11, 2014 —
    There are just three weeks remaining to sign up for Bert L. Howe & Associate’s next California MCLE seminar, UNDERSTANDING CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION. This activity will be presented on Friday, July 11th at noon, at BHA’s Sacramento office: 2520 Venture Oaks Way Suite 435 Sacramento, CA 95833 There is no cost for attendance at this seminar and lunch will be provided. This course has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California Committee on MCLE in the amount of 1.0 credit hours, of which 0.0 credit hours will apply to legal ethics/professional responsibility credit. The seminar will be presented by Don MacGregor, general contractor and project manager. Water intrusion through doors, windows and roofing systems, as well as soil and foundation-related movement, and the resultant damage associated therewith, are the triggering effects for the vast majority of homeowner complaints today and serve as the basis for most residential construction defect litigation. The graphic and animation-supported workshop/lecture activity will focus on the residential construction process from site preparation through occupancy, an examination of associated damages most often encountered when investigating construction defect claims, and the inter-relationships between the developer, general contractor, sub trades and design professionals. Typical plaintiff homeowner/HOA expert allegations will be examined in connection with those building components most frequently associated with construction defect and claims litigation. The workshop will examine: * Typical construction materials, and terminology associated with residential construction * The installation process and sequencing of major construction elements, including interrelationship with other building assemblies * The parties (subcontractors) typically associated with major construction assemblies and components * An analysis of exposure/allocation to responsible parties. Attendance at THE UNDERSTANDING CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION seminar will provide the attendee with: * A greater understanding of the terms and conditions encountered when dealing with common construction defect issues * A greater understanding of contractual scopes of work encountered when reviewing construction contract documents * The ability to identify, both quickly and accurately, potentially responsible parties * An understanding of damages most often associated with construction defects, as well as a greater ability to identify conditions triggering coverage To register for the event, please email Don MacGregor at dmac@berthowe.com. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Don at (800) 482-1822 (office) or (714) 713-4956 (cell). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Defective Stairways can be considered a Patent Construction Defect in California

    September 24, 2014 —
    Stairs are not safe! At least the Court of Appeal in the Second Appellate District of California doesn’t think so. A rail station in Los Angeles was completed by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) in 1993. The rail station was part of the development of the Southern California Rapid Transit District Metro Rail Project. In 2011, the plaintiff fell on a stairway at the station. In August 2012, Plaintiff sued the MTA for dangerous condition of public property, statutory liability, and negligence. Among other defects, plaintiff alleged the banister of the stairwell was “too low” and the stairwell “too small” given the number, age, and volume of people habitually entering and exiting the rail station. In addition, plaintiff alleged that MTA “failed to provide adequate safeguards against the known dangerous condition by, among other acts and omissions, failing to properly design, construct, supervise, inspect and repair the Premises causing the same to be unsafe and defective for its intended purposes.” MTA, in turn, cross-complained against Hampton- the entity that provided design and construction services at the station. Hampton demurred to the first amended cross-complaint, asserting a four year statute of limitations defense pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.1, claiming the alleged deficiencies were patent defects. On September 11, 2013, the trial court overruled the demurrer finding that the defect was not patent. Hampton appealed. The appellate court overruled the trial court’s ruling and in fact, granted Hampton’s writ of mandate and even directed the trial court to sustain the demurrer without leave to amend! (Delon Hampton & Associates v. Sup. Ct. (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 3; June 23, 2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 250, [173 Cal.Rptr.3d 407].) The appellate court found that the purpose of section 337.1 is to “provide a final point of termination, to proctect some groups from extended liability.” A “patent deficiency” has been defined as a deficiency which is apparent by reasonable inspection. See Tomko Woll Group Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1326, 1336. The court found a patent defect can be discovery by the kind of inspection made in the exercise of ordinary care and prudence, whereas a latent defect is hidden and would not be discovered by a reasonably careful inspection. See Preston v. Goldman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 108, 123. The test to determine whether a construction defect is patent is an objective test that asks “whether the average consumer, during the course of a reasonable inspection, would discover the defect…” See Creekbridge Townhome Owners Assn., Inc. v. C. Scott Whitten, Inc. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 251, 256. Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    August 27, 2014 —
    The earthquake that struck northern California yesterday will lead to economic losses of as much as $4 billion, fueled by damaged wineries and shuttered businesses that rely on tourists. Insurers will probably cover about $2.1 billion, according to an estimate from Kinetic Analysis Corp., which projected total losses of about twice that sum. Costs borne by the industry may be limited because many homeowners don’t have earthquake coverage, according to the Insurance Information Institute. “The main source of claims could well be commercial claims, those coming from wineries and vineyards and other commercial interests,” Robert Hartwig, the institute’s president, said in an interview today. “It will take a while for the business owners to sort this out.” Mr. Marois may be contacted at mmarois@bloomberg.net; Mr. Tracer may be contacted at ztracer1@bloomberg.net; Mr. Hart may be contacted at dahart@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael B. Marois, Zachary Tracer and Dan Hart, Bloomberg

    Final Rule Regarding Project Labor Agreement Requirements for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    January 29, 2024 —
    Beginning on January 22, 2024, in compliance with President Biden’s February 4, 2022 Executive Order, 14603, federal construction projects with a total estimated cost of $35 million are required to utilize a project labor agreement (“PLA”) unless the contracting agency grants an exception. The Federal Register estimates that this rule will impact approximately 119 IDIQ contracts each year; these contracts have an average award value of about $114 million. The White House claims the PLAs will improve projects by:
    • Eliminating project delays from labor unrest, such as strikes;
    • Creating dispute resolution procedures and cooperation for labor-management disputes, such as those over safety;
    • Including provisions “to support workers from underserved communities and small businesses”;
    • Helping to create a steady pipeline of workers for federal projects; and
    • Promoting competition on government contracts so that all builders, even those who are non-union, can bid on jobs that require a PLA.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    July 09, 2014 —
    Garret Murai, on his California Construction Law Blog, stated that California’s Business and Professions Code Section 7031 has often been described as draconian, harsh, and unjust—but still enforceable. The section does two things: first, it “prohibits unlicensed or improperly licensed contractors from suing to recover compensation for construction work requiring a license,” and second, it “permits property owners to sue such contractors for disgorgement of all compensation paid for such work.” According to Murai, the “strict enforcement of Section 7031” is thought to ensure “that contractors meet the minimum qualifications necessary for licensure.” Murai analyzed the case E. J. Franks Construction, Inc. v Sahota, which “carved out a limited exception to Section 7031 for contractors who form business entities and transfer their existing contractor’s license to such entities.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Falls Requiring Time Off from Work are Increasing

    January 14, 2015 —
    The Safety News Alert reported that while “overall occupational injuries that require time off from work” have decreased, other injuries, such as falls, have increased, according to findings from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) annual report. “The rate of falls on the same level increased to 15.4 in 2013 from 14.8 in 2012, with increases in construction, wholesale trade, and transportation and warehousing,” Safety News Alert wrote. Furthermore, “Incidence rates and counts for private sector heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers and food preparation workers increased in 2013.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of