BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut architecture expert witnessFairfield Connecticut hospital construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut construction expert testimonyFairfield Connecticut expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2025 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2022 Top Lawyers!

    Basement Foundation Systems’ Getting an Overhaul

    Roadway Contractor Owed Duty of Care to Driver Injured Outside of Construction Zone

    Construction News Roundup

    Catch 22: “If You’re Moving Dirt, You Need to Control Your Dust” (But Don’t Use Potable Water!)

    NEHRP Recommendations Likely To Improve Seismic Design

    EEOC Suit Alleges Site Managers Bullied Black Workers on NY Project

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    London Office Builders Aren’t Scared of Brexit Anymore

    Nevada Insureds Can Rely on Extrinsic Facts to Show that An Insurer Owes a Duty to Defend

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    How SmartThings Wants to Automate Your Home

    20 Years of BHA at West Coast Casualty's CD Seminar: Chronicling BHA's Innovative Exhibits

    Mediation Fails In Federal Lawsuit Seeking Damages From Sureties for Alleged Contract Fraud

    Alleged Negligent Misrepresentation on Condition of Home is Not an Occurrence Causing Property Damage

    California Court of Appeal Clarifies Intent of Faulty Workmanship Exclusions

    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    Other Colorado Cities Looking to Mirror Lakewood’s Construction Defect Ordinance

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Tender Is the Fight”

    Defense for Additional Insured Not Barred By Sole Negligence Provision

    New Home Sales Slip, but Still Strong

    Corvette museum likely to keep part of sinkhole

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    Flying Solo: How it Helps My Construction Clients

    Connecticutt Class Action on Collapse Claims Faces Motion to Dismiss

    Focusing on Design Elements of the 2014 World Cup Stadiums

    AAA Revises its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Appraisal Process Analyzed

    Tall Mass Timber Buildings Now Possible Under 2021 IBC Code Changes

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

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Policy's One Year Suit Limitation Does Not Apply to Challenging the Insurer's Claims Handling

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Reasonableness of Denial of Requests for Admission Based Upon Expert’s Opinions Depends On Factors Within Party’s Understanding

    Responding to Ransomware Learning from Colonial Pipeline

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    Georgia Supreme Court Says Construction Defects Can Be an “Occurrence”

    Seventh Circuit Remands “Waters of the United States” Case to Corps of Engineers to Determine Whether there is a “Significant Nexus”

    AIA Releases State-Specific Waiver and Release Forms

    Washington First State to Require Electric Heat Pumps

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    Hunton Andrews Kurth’s Insurance Recovery Practice, Partners Larry Bracken and Mike Levine Receive Band 1 Honors from Chambers USA in Georgia

    Bad Faith Claim For Independent Contractor's Reduced Loss Assessment Survives Motion to Dismiss
    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

    CGL Insurer’s Duty To Defend Broader Than Duty To Indemnify And Based On Allegations In Underlying Complaint

    April 10, 2019 —
    The duty to defend an insured with respect to a third-party claim is broader than the duty to indemnify the insured for that claim. The duty to defend is triggered by allegations in the underlying complaint. However, an insurer is only required to indemnify its insured for damages covered under the policy. A recent case example demonstrating the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify can be found in Southern Owners Ins. Co. v. Gallo Building Services, Inc., 2018 WL 6619987 (M.D.Fla. 2019). In this case, a homebuilder built a 270-unit condominium project where the units were included in 51-buildings. Upon turnover of the condominium association to the unit owners, the condominium association served a Florida Statutes Chapter 558 Notice of Construction Defects letter. There was numerous nonconforming work spread out among various subcontractor trades including nonconforming stucco work. The homebuilder incurred significant costs to repair defective work and resulting property damage, and relocated unit owners during repairs. The homebuilder then filed a lawsuit against implicated subcontractors. One of the implicated subcontractors was the stucco subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Killer Subcontract Provisions

    January 20, 2020 —
    We are frequently requested by subcontractor clients to review the subcontract that has been prepared by the prime contractor, before our client signs it. While no two agreements are identical, there are a number of problematic contract provisions that appear in many agreements. Here is a list of ten such provisions (and their variations) that are potential “deal breakers”:
    1. PAY IF/WHEN PAID (e.g. “Contractor shall have the right to exhaust all legal remedies, including appeals, prior to having an obligation to pay Subcontractor.”) “Pay-if-paid” provisions (“Receipt of payment from Owner shall be a condition precedent to Contractor’s duty to pay Subcontractor”) are illegal in California. However, the only legal limit on “Pay-When-Paid” provisions is that payment must be made “within a reasonable time.” The example above, as written, essentially affords the prime contractor a period of several years following completion of the project before that contractor has an independent duty to pay its subcontractors – not a “reasonable” amount of time, to those waiting to be paid. A compromise is to provide a time limit, such as 6 months or one year following substantial completion of the project.
    2. CROSS-PROJECT SET-OFF (e.g. “In the event of disputes or default by Subcontractor, Contractor shall have the right to withhold sums due Subcontractor on this Project and on any other project on which Subcontractor is performing work for Contractor.”) Such provisions are problematic and likely unenforceable, as they potentially bar subcontractors’ lien rights. Such provisions should be deleted.
    3. CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR DESIGN QUALITY (e.g. “Subcontractor warrants that the Work shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”) Unless a subcontractor’s scope of work expressly includes design work, this provision should either be deleted or modified, with the addition of the following phrase: “Subcontractor shall not be responsible for conformance of the design of its work to applicable laws, codes, statutes, standards, and ordinances.”
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Patrick McNamara, Porter Law Group
    Mr. McNamara may be contacted at pmcnamara@porterlaw.com

    How U.S. Design and Architecture Firms Can Profit from the Chinese Market and Avoid Pitfalls

    December 23, 2024 —
    Despite recent challenges, including obvious political tensions, economic cooling in the PRC, and increased local competition, the Chinese market remains an attractive destination for U.S. design and architecture firms. For instance, PEI Architects has maintained its success in China through long-standing relationships with key clients and is currently involved in two major projects for the Bank of China: a 1.9 million-square-foot complex in Shanghai and a financial center in Haikou.[i] Similarly, NBBJ is playing a critical role in the development of Tencent’s Net City in Shenzhen, a 2-million-square-meter smart city project that aligns with China's goals of sustainable and tech-driven urbanization.[ii] These examples show that while the Chinese market presents challenges, it continues to offer significant opportunities, particularly in sectors where innovative and cutting-edge architectural solutions are in high demand. At the same time, U.S. firms should exercise care: proper advance planning and strategic alliances are crucial for profitable forays into the Chinese market. JR Design Project: A Cautionary Tale When operating in China, U.S. design firms often encounter regulatory challenges, particularly with respect to China’s strict qualification requirements for architectural design services. Failure to meet these requirements can result in serious legal issues, including the potential invalidation of design contracts, as demonstrated in a leading case decided by the Supreme People’s Court of PRC (the nation’s highest court). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chengdong ("C.D.") Xing, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP
    Mr. Xing may be contacted at chengdong.xing@rajahtann.com

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    November 08, 2021 —
    Florida has a ten-year statute of repose which applies predominantly to construction defect claims. This can be found in Florida Statute s. 95.11(3)(c). After ten years, any rights relative to a construction defect claim are time-barred. However, the statute of repose date has been watered down and can be made to be more of a factual question due to the lack of objectivity as to the date that starts the ten-year repose clock. The watering down of the statute of repose date benefits parties asserting construction defect claims provided they strategically appreciate the question of fact that can be created when up against the statute of repose. Stated differently, when up against the clock to assert a construction defect claim, strategically develop those facts, evidence, and arguments to maximize creating a question of fact as to when the statute of repose clock commenced. Conversely, as a defendant sued for construction defects, you want to maximize the facts, evidence, and arguments to fully establish the date the statute of repose clock had to commence for purposes of a statute of repose defense. The recent opinion in Spring Isle Community Association, Inc. v. Herme Enterprises, Inc., 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2306b (Fla. 5th DCA 2021) demonstrates the factual question associated with the clock that starts the statute of repose date. This factual question is created by Florida Statute s. 95.11(3)(c) that provides:
    [T]he action [founded on the design, planning, or construction of an improvement to real property] must be commenced within 10 years after the date of actual possession by the owner, the date of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the date of abandonment of construction if not completed, or the date of completion or termination of the contract between the professional engineer, registered architect, or licensed contractor and his or her employer, whichever date is latest.
    Spring Isle Community Association, supra. (Note, see also current s. 95.11(3)(c) version in effect per hyperlink above.)
    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

    What You Need to Know About Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility

    June 30, 2016 —
    We talk a lot about contractors on the California Construction Law Blog. Owners? Not so much. So this one’s for you. Why are Notices of Completion, Cessation and Non-Responsibility Important to Owners? California recognizes three types of statutory notices on construction projects available to owners:
    • Notices of completion;
    • Notices of cessation; and
    • Notices of non-responsibility.
    • Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
      Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

      Party Cannot Skirt Out of the Very Fraud It Perpetrates

      January 09, 2023 —
      An interesting case came out of Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal that touches upon two important points. First, the independent tort doctrine does not apply when there is not a contract between the parties. Second, an officer cannot escape fraud simply by claiming his or her actions were done as an officer of the company when he or she actively participated in the fraud. Both of these points are best explained by initially going into the facts of this case. As you will see, the Court’s rationale relates to the premise that a party should not be able to skirt out of the very fraud it perpetrates. Factual Background Costa Investors, LLC v. Liberty Grande, LLC, 48 Fla.L.Weekly D7b (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) involved the ultimate development and construction of four adjacent properties into the Costa Hollywood Hotel. The properties were purchased by a company called Liberty Grande. Its president / manager was also the president of Liberty Grande’s wholly owned subsidiary called Costa Hollywood Property. Liberty Grande transferred the properties to Costa Hollywood Property and the deed was signed by the president / manager. 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

      60-Mile-Long Drone Inspection Flight Points to the Future

      January 15, 2019 —
      Black & Veatch announced in December the successful conclusion of a 60-mile-log, non-stop, proof-of-concept drone-based inspection flight conducted by a remote pilot in a command center miles away in rural Illinois. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of Tom Sawyer, ENR
      Mr. Sawyer may be contacted at sawyert@enr.com

      Jobsite Safety Should Be Every Contractors' Priority

      December 09, 2019 —
      Any general contractor understands the range of factors that go into building and sustaining a successful jobsite: hiring the right team, maintaining cutting-edge equipment, ensuring constant communication with clients and effectively leveraging the newest building technologies, just to name a few. But any good general contractor understands that there is one factor that should always be considered as top priority: jobsite safety. The health and wellbeing of a project’s team is paramount for obvious reasons, and it isn’t a lighthearted matter. Injuries and fatalities have too often been a piece of our industry’s story. In 2017 alone, there were 971 reported deaths on construction sites, which accounted for 20% of total worker fatalities, according to a report from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Of these 971 fatalities, 582 were the result of construction’s “fatal four”—falls, workers being struck by objects, electrocutions and workers being caught between equipment. For members of the industry, these are difficult numbers to read and to process; yet, it is extremely important to consider the injuries and lives lost when we take into consideration the seriousness of jobsite safety. Often, general contractors’ and superintendents’ greatest challenge isn’t being convinced of the necessity of jobsite safety practices in protecting employees or the value of safety in creating a productive work environment. Instead, the focus should be providing industry leaders tips on exactly how to improve safety measures on their own jobsites. Understanding that safety is everyone’s responsibility is paramount. Reprinted courtesy of Ray Reese, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
      Read the full story...
      Reprinted courtesy of
      Mr. Reese may be contacted at rreese@rives.com