BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing and waterproofing expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expertsFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut concrete 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


    Navigating the Construction Burrito: OCIP Policies in California’s Construction Defect Cases

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    9th Circuit Closes the Door on “Open Shop” Contractor

    Traub Lieberman Team Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Client Under Florida’s Newly Implemented Summary Judgment Standard

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    Time to Update Your Virginia Mechanic’s Lien Forms (July 1, 2019)

    New York Public Library’s “Most Comprehensive Renovation” In Its History

    Providing Notice of Claims Under Your Construction Contract

    Additional Insured is Loss Payee after Hurricane Damage

    DC Circuit Approves, with Some Misgivings, FERC’s Approval of the Atlantic Sunrise Natural Gas Pipeline Extension

    Insurer's Late Notice Defense Fails on Summary Judgment

    Trump Sues Casinos to Get Conditions Fixed or Name Off

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    Minnesota Senate Office Building Called Unconstitutional

    ASCE Statement on Devastating Tornado Damages Throughout U.S.

    Breach Of Duty of Good Faith And Fair Dealing Packaged With Contract Disputes Act Claim

    Formaldehyde-Free Products for Homes

    Industry Standard and Sole Negligence Defenses Can’t Fix a Defect

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    Are Construction Defect Claims Covered Under CGL Policies?

    PA Supreme Court to Rule on Scope of Judges' Credibility Determinations

    Mutual Or Concurrent Delay Caused By Subcontractors

    Chambers USA 2021 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Demanding a Reduction in Retainage

    2016 California Construction Law Upate

    Spearin Doctrine as an Affirmative Defense

    Lumber Liquidators’ Home-Testing Methods Get EPA Scrutiny

    Federal Subcontractor Who Failed to Follow FAR Regulations Finds That “Fair” and “Just” are Not Synonymous

    Motion for Reconsideration Challenging Appraisal Determining Cause of Loss Denied

    This Company Wants to Cut Emissions to Zero in the Dirty Cement Business

    Approaches to Managing Job Site Inventory

    Charles Carter v. Pulte Home Corporation

    Boston Nonprofit Wants to Put Grown-Ups in Dorms

    Good Signs for Housing Market in 2013

    North Carolina Learns More Lessons From Latest Storm

    Benford’s Law: A Seldom Used Weapon in Forensic Accounting

    California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of anti-SLAPP Motion in Dispute Over Construction of Church Facilities

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

    Is Safety Compliance Putting Your Project in Jeopardy? Examining the Essentials of DOE’s Worker Safety and Health Program

    “Wait! Do You Have All Your Ducks in a Row?” Filing of a Certificate of Merit in Conjunction With a Complaint

    What is a Personal Injury?

    Ill-fated Complaint Fails to State Claims Against Broker and FEMA

    Scott Saylin Expands Employment Litigation and Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    Storm Eunice Damage in U.K. Could Top £300 Million

    Is the Issuance of a City Use Permit Referable? Not When It Is an Administrative Act

    Nevada Supreme Court Rejects Class Action Status, Reducing Homes from 1000 to 71

    Connecticut Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    New Certification Requirements for Veteran-Owned Small Business Concerns and Service-Disabled Veteran-owned Small Business Concerns Seeking Public Procurement Contracts

    Traub Lieberman Partner Kathryn Keller and Associate Steven Hollis Secure Final Summary Judgment in Favor of Homeowner’s Insurance Company
    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

    Alabama Supreme Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect to Contractor's own Product

    October 21, 2013 —
    The Alabama Supreme Court followed prior precedent and found that the contractor's faulty workmanship causing damage to his own product did not arise from an occurrence. Owners Ins. Co. v. Jim Carr Homebuilder, LLC, 2013 Ala. LEXIS 122 (Ala. Sept. 20, 2013). The plaintiffs contracted with Carr to construct a new home. After completion of the home and taking occupancy, the plaintiffs noted several problems with the house related to water leaking through the roof, walls and floors, resulting in water damage to various areas of the house. The plaintiffs sued Carr and the case eventually went to arbitration. The arbitrator entered an award in favor of plaintiffs for $600,000. Owners filed an action against Carr for a declaratory judgment seeking to establish there was no coverage because the property damage did not arise from an occurrence. The trial court granted summary judgment to Carr. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Colorado Court of Appeals has decided a case which answers a question long in need of an answer: do banks/lenders have standing to assert construction defect claims when they receive title to a newly-constructed home following a foreclosure sale or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure? The decision was released on August 1, 2013, in the case of Mid Valley Real Estate Solutions V, LLC v. Hepworth-Pawlack Geotechnical, Inc., Steve Pawlak, Daniel Hadin, and S K Peightal Engineers, Ltd. (Colorado Court of Appeals No. 13CA0519). The background facts of the case are typical of a Colorado residential construction defect case generally. A developer contracted for an analytical soil engineering report from a geotechnical engineering firm (H-P) which made a foundation recommendation. The developer’s general contractor then retained an engineering firm (SPKE) to provide engineering services, including a foundation design. The general contractor built the foundation in accordance with the H-P and SPKE criteria and plans. The house was not sold by the developer and went into default on the construction loan. These events resulted in a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure to a bank-controlled entity which purchased the house for re-sale. Shortly after receiving the developer’s deed, the bank-related entity discovered defects in the foundation that resulted in a construction defect suit against the two design firms and related individuals. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of W. Berkeley Mann, Jr.
    W. Berkeley Mann, Jr. can be contacted at mann@hhmrlaw.com

    Henkels & McCoy Pays $1M in Federal Overtime-Pay Case

    July 19, 2021 —
    In a consent judgment in a federal labor case, major specialty contractor Henkels & McCoy Inc. has paid about $1.1 million in back pay and damages for allegedly not paying required overtime wages to 362 current and former workers in five states, the U.S. Dept. of Labor says. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (03/01/23) – Mass Timber, IIJA Funding, and Distressed Real Estate

    March 13, 2023 —
    This week’s round-up explores how Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) funding is being deployed, mass timber is on the rise as decarbonization efforts continue, and commercial real estate remains distressed.
    • With a flurry of high-profile projects, mass timber is gaining traction. (Jeffrey Steele, Commercial Property Executive)
    • Commercial real estate is experiencing high levels of distress, with multiple owners defaulting on loans across the country. (Ted Glanzer, The Real Deal)
    • Even with the recent downturn in cryptocurrency value, the metaverse real estate market is expected to continue to grow. (The Real Deal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Construction Defect Notice in the Mailbox? Respond Appropriately

    August 04, 2011 —

    Recently, I have seen a rash of ignored construction defect notices. What is a construction defect notice? It’s a statutorily required notice, sent from a homeowner to a contractor, listing a number of defects found at their property. If you get one, don’t ignore it.

    The Revised Code of Washington includes a number of provisions intended for residential construction disputes. Among them is the “Notice to Customer” requirement in RCW 18.27.114, which can preempt a contractor’s lien rights, and the “Notice of Construction Defects” found in RCW 64.50.020.

    The Notice of Construction Defects is a standard notice mandated by RCW 64.50, a chapter in the Revised Code of Washington, intended to provide a pre-litigation resolution process for contractors and consumers. The chapter applies only to those losses “caused by a defect in the construction of a residence or in the substantial remodel of a residence.”(See “Action” RCW 64.50.010).

    Unfortunately, many contractors will simply ignore these notices or tell the homeowner to make a warranty claim. But, the notice actually provides a contractor with a forty-five (45) day window to alleviate the dispute.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Douglas Reiser of Reiser Legal LLC. Mr. Reiser can be contacted at info@reiserlegal.com

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

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    July 05, 2023 —
    A common provision often deleted from the standard form AIA documents is the provision in the AIA A201 General Conditions requiring an Initial Decision Maker (IDM) for claims between the contractor and owner. In the A201, the contracting parties have the option of naming their own IDM for the project. If an IDM is not selected (which is typically the case) the architect serves this role by default. While it is in all parties’ best interests to resolve disputes quickly and efficiently, using the architect as the IDM is not the best way to achieve such a resolution. Several reasons work against using the architect as the IDM. Contractors typically don’t trust architects to be impartial in resolving disputes because the architect is paid by the owner. Most architects don’t have the temperament or any training to facilitate dispute resolution. An architect’s “initial decision” could even drive the parties further apart and lead to further issues later in the project. The architect may also be perceived to be part of the problem that led to the dispute in the first place. Also, many architects simply prefer to avoid serving the thankless role of an IDM altogether. Lastly, inserting the architect into the dispute resolution process as a required IDM adds an additional unnecessary step to dispute resolution, which can delay the overall procedure. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bill Wilson, Robinson & Cole LLP
    Mr. Wilson may be contacted at wwilson@rc.com

    City Development with Interactive 3D Models

    October 23, 2018 —
    The Finnish city of Hyvinkää has developed a unique internet service for collaborative 3D city planning. It gives real estate owners, investors, developers, designers, authorities, and citizens easy-to-use tools to publish their 3D plans and ideas for the built city environment. Participants can comment on the 3D plans directly in the city model. The 3D app is integrated with Facebook, which enables further conversation. Building the 3D City Model Päivi Tiihonen is the manager of the information services unit of the city’s technical and environmental sector. The city started building a browser-based 3D city model when Tiihonen assumed her position in 2014. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

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

    October 07, 2024 —
    The California Supreme Court held that the policy's suit limitation of one year, consistent with the statute requiring suit be file within twelve months after a loss, did not apply to claims alleging violation of the state's unfair competition law (UCL). Rosenberg-Wohl v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 2024 Cal. LEXIS 3806 (Cal. July 18, 2024). Plaintiff held a homeowners policy issued by State Farm that provided coverage for all risks except those specifically excluded under the policy. The suit limitation provision provided, "Suit Against Us. No action shall be brought unless there has been compliance with the policy provision.The action must be started within one year after the date of loss or damage." On two occasions in late 2018 or early 2019, plaintiff's neighbor stumble and fell as she descended a staircase at plaintiff's residence. Plaintiff discovered that the pitch of the stairs had changed, and replacement of the stairs was required to fix the issue. She contacted State Farm on or around April 23, 2019. On August 9, 2019, plaintiff submitted a claim to State Farm, seeking reimbursement for what she paid to repair the staircase. State Farm denied the claim, advising there was no coverage and identifying several exclusions as potentially applicable. 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