BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering consultantFairfield Connecticut concrete expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut civil engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant 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


    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    Independent Contractor v. Employee. The “ABC Test” Does Not Include a Threshold Hiring Entity Test

    Florida Contractor on Trial for Bribing School Official

    Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams. Unlicensed Contractor Takes the Cake

    CSLB’s Military Application Assistance Program

    Florida Adopts Less Stringent Summary Judgment Standard

    Flag on the Play! Expired Contractor’s License!

    California Attempts to Tackle Housing Affordability Crisis

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Housing Starts Surge 23% in Comeback for Canadian Builders

    Insurer in Bad Faith For Refusing to Commit to Appraisal

    The Coronavirus, Zoom Meetings and Now a CCPA Class Action

    Is Everybody Single? More Than Half the U.S. Now, Up From 37% in '76

    Be a Good Neighbor: Protect Against Claims by an Adjacent Landowner During Construction

    Architect Responds to Defect Lawsuit over Defects at Texas Courthouse

    Rhode Island Sues 13 Industry Firms Over Flawed Interstate Bridge

    Where There's Smoke...California's New Emergency Wildfire Smoke Protection Regulation And What Employers Are Required To Do

    Irvine Partner Cinnamon J. Carr and Associate Brittney H. Aquino Prevail on Summary Judgment

    No Coverage Based Upon Your Prior Work Exclusion

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

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    New Jersey Construction Worker Sentenced for Home Repair Fraud

    Congratulations 2024 DE, MA, MD, NJ, NY, and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Claims for Negligence? Duty to Defend Triggered

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    Workers on Big California Bridge Tackle Oil Wells, Seismic Issues

    Pinterest Nixes Big San Francisco Lease Deal in Covid Scaleback

    Don’t Let Construction Problems Become Construction Disputes (guest post)

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    Are Housing Prices Poised to Fall in Denver?

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    Airbnb Declares End to Party!

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

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 4: Coverage for Supply Chain Related Losses

    There's No Such Thing as a Free House

    CISA Guidance 3.1: Not Much Change for Construction

    Defect Claims Called “Witch Hunt”

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing ETS Unveiled

    California Judicial Council Votes to Rescind Prohibitions on Eviction and Foreclosure Proceedings

    Structural Defects in Thousands of Bridges in America

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

    Coloradoans Deserve More Than Hyperbole and Rhetoric from Plaintiffs’ Attorneys; We Deserve Attainable Housing

    Lessee Deemed Statutory Employer, Immune from Tort Liability by Pennsylvania Court

    Ex-Corps Worker Pleads Guilty to Bribery on Afghan Contract

    Pine Island Bridge in Place as Florida Pushes Barrier Island Access in Ian's Wake

    You’re Only as Good as Those with Whom You Contract

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

    Construction Attorneys Tell DBR that Business is on the Rise

    BHA Has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports NCHV and Final Salute at 2017 WCC Seminar
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Fairfield's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    California Clarifies Its Inverse Condemnation Standard

    December 30, 2019 —
    In City of Oroville v. Superior Court, 446 P.3d 304 (Cal. 2019), the Supreme Court of California considered whether the City of Oroville (City) was liable to a dental practice for inverse condemnation damages associated with a sewer backup. The court held that in order to establish inverse condemnation against a public entity, a property owner must show that an inherent risk in the public improvement was a substantial cause of the damage. Since the dental practice did not have a code-required backwater valve — which would have prevented or minimized this loss — the court found that the city was not liable because the sewage system was not a substantial cause of the loss. This case establishes that a claim for inverse condemnation requires a showing of a substantial causal connection between the public improvement and the property damage. It also suggests that comparative negligence can be a defense to inverse condemnation claims. In December 2009, a dental practice, WGS Dental Complex (WGS), located in the City, incurred significant water damage as a result of untreated sewage from the City’s sewer main backing up into WGS’ building. WGS submitted a claim to its insurance carrier, The Dentists Insurance Company (TDIC) and, in addition, sued the City for its uninsured losses, alleging inverse condemnation and nuisance. TDIC joined the litigation, alleging negligence, nuisance, trespass and inverse condemnation. Under California law, when a government entity fails to recognize that an action or circumstance essentially amounts to a taking for public use, a property owner can pursue an inverse condemnation action for compensation. The City filed a cross-complaint against WGS for failing to install a code-required backwater valve on their lateral sewer line, which would have prevented or minimized the backup. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court denied. WGS then sought a judicial determination on the issue of inverse condemnation. The City presented evidence that the sewage system was designed in accordance with industry standards, and that WGS failed to comply with the City’s plumbing code by failing to install a backwater valve on its private sewer lateral. The trial court found the City liable for inverse condemnation because the blockage that caused the backup originated in the City’s sewer line. The court held that the blockage was an inherent risk of sewer operation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, holding that the City would have had to prove that the WGS’s lack of a backwater valve was the sole cause of the loss in order to absolve itself of liability. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com

    Texas Construction Firm Officials Sentenced in Contract-Fraud Case

    August 07, 2018 —
    Two top officials of a Texas construction company—Honest, Experienced, Reliable Contracting Solutions LLC—have been sentenced to federal prison terms for defrauding the State Dept. through a plan to steer more than $1 million in contracts to the company, the Dept. of Justice says. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com

    Hawaii Court of Appeals Finds Insured AOAO Not Liable for Securing Inadequate Insurance

    March 04, 2024 —
    The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) affirmed the trial court's finding that the insured Association of Apartment Owners (AOAO) was not liable for securing a policy with inadequate coverage. AOAO Queen Emma Gardens, et al v. Wa, 2023 Haw. App. LEXIS 400 (Haw. Ct. App. Dec. 19, 2023). In October 2002, the Was purchased a condominium located in the Queen Emma Gardens Condominium. The AOAO's bylaws provided that it would procure and maintain insurance "to insure the Board, the Association, and each apartment owner against claims for personal injury, death, and property damage arising out of the condition of the property or activities thereon . . ." The AOAO secured a CGL policy from Insurance Association, Inc., with coverage limits for bodily injury at $1,000,000 and an umbrella policy providing an additional $5,000,000 of coverage. Each of the policies "insured each individual insurance owner of the insured condominium, but only with respect to liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance or repair of that portion of the premises which is not reserved for that unit owner's exclusive use or occupancy." 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

    Failing to Release A Mechanics Lien Can Destroy Your Construction Business

    May 01, 2023 —
    Is the title to this article possibly true? Yes, absolutely! I have seen it happen. Let me tell you how it happens so you can avoid such a result. When contractors, subcontractors or suppliers in California construction projects are not paid they often record a mechanics lien on the property on which they worked. This is a customary accepted legal process for the claimant to secure its right to payment. The mechanics lien enables the claimant to eventually sell the property and obtain payment from the proceeds to the extent they remain unpaid. California Civil Code Section 8460 generally requires that a lawsuit to foreclose on a mechanics’ lien must be filed in court within ninety (90) days after the mechanics’ lien is recorded. If no lawsuit has been filed in court within this 90-day period, then the lien generally becomes unenforceable. Because the mechanics lien remains a cloud on the title to the property if not released, the lien claimant usually releases the mechanics lien if they have failed to meet the lawsuit deadline. Lien claimants will also release a lien and/or dismiss the foreclosure lawsuit in exchange for payment. It is rare that the property is actually sold to obtain payment. This is a brief description of the pathway to payment through the use of a mechanics lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    May 06, 2024 —
    After WAY too long a hiatus, I am back with another in my series of “Construction Contract Basics” posts. In past posts, I’ve covered venue provisions, attorney fee provisions, and indemnity clauses. In this post, I’ll share a few thoughts (or “musings”) on the topic of so-called “no damages for delay” clauses. These clauses essentially state that a subcontractor’s only remedy for a delay caused by any factor beyond its control (including the fault of the general contractor), after proper notice to the owner or general contractor, is an extension of time to complete the work. These types of clauses generally make it impossible for a subcontractor (if found in a Subcontract) or Contractor (if found in a Prime Contract) that is delayed through no fault of its own to recover any damages relating to the expenses that are inevitably caused by such delays. Such expenses/damages could include additional supervisory time (including more high-dollar superintendent payments), acceleration costs, demobilization/mobilization costs, and other related expenses. These can add up to real money. Couple that with the inevitable liquidated damages or delay damages that will occur should a contractor or subcontractor cause any delay, and this becomes a very one-sided proposition. 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

    Differing Rulings On Construction Defect Claims Leave Unanswered Questions For Builders, and Construction Practice Groups. Impact to CGL Carriers, General Contractors, Builders Remains Unclear

    March 07, 2011 —

    In the past year a number of state and federal courts have rendered a number of conflicting decisions that promise to alter or perhaps shift entirely the paradigm, of how builders manage risk.

    According to a report today by Dave Lenckus in Property Casualty 360 “Nine state and federal courts and one state legislature over the past year have addressed whether a construction defect a defective product or faulty workmanship is fortuitous and therefore an occurrence under the commercial general liability insurance policy. Four jurisdictions determined it is; three said no; two ruled that a construction defect that causes consequential damage to property other than the work product is an occurrence; and one federal court contributed its conflicting case law that has developed in Oregon since its high court ruled in 2000 that a construction defect is not an occurrence”.

    The article strongly suggests that in the absence of a clear consensus over what the recent rulings mean for builders and contractors coverage disputes will intensify and continue to proliferate.

    Doing this on a state-by-state basis has caused a lot of confusion among buyers and sellers, said Jeffrey A. Segall, a Tampa-based senior vice president and the Florida Construction Practice leader at Willis of Florida, a unit of Willis Group Holdings.

    Read Full Story...

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

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    July 06, 2020 —
    Although the appellate court agreed there was property damage caused by an occurrence, the "your work" exclusion barred the insured contractor's claim. King's Cove Marina, LLC v. Lambert Commercial Construction. LLC, 2019 Minn. App. LEXIS 389 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 16, 2019). King's Cover Marina sought to expand and remodel its main building. The marina hired Lambert to perform the remodeling project. Lambert hired Roehl Construction, Inc. as a subcontractor to install new concrete footings on the main level of the building and to provide concrete for the second-level mezzanine floor. After completion, the marina sued Lambert for breach of contract and negligence. The marina alleged that the concrete floors on the first and second levels were not constructed in accordance with industry standards or with project plans and specifications, resulting in excessive movement and cracking of the new concrete floors. Lambert tendered its defense to its insurer, United Fire & Casualty Company. United Fire defended under a reservation of rights and later sued Lambert for declaratory judgment. 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

    Construction Delays for China’s Bahamas Resort Project

    October 01, 2014 —
    The Wall Street Journal reported that the $3.5 billion resort and casino China’s building in the Bahamas is being undermined by delays and labor crashes, which is “dulling the buzz surrounding the venture and threaten to undermine China's future business.” Once finished, the project “will include 2,200 new hotel rooms, luxury condominiums priced as high as $12 million, a 100,000-square-foot casino and an 18-hole golf course. Singer Lenny Kravitz is designing the nightclub.” Baha Mar, the developers, told the Wall Street Journal that they will not be meeting their December 2014 deadline, and instead are “focused on late spring 2015.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of