BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction forensic expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnesses
    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


    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    Do Not File a Miller Act Payment Bond Lawsuit After the One-Year Statute of Limitations

    Sales of U.S. Existing Homes Rise to One-Year High

    Adobe Opens New Office Tower and Pledges No Companywide Layoffs in 2023

    Brown Orders Mandatory Water Curbs for California Drought

    How Artificial Intelligence Can Transform Construction

    Gone Fishing: Tenant’s Insurer Casts A Line Seeking To Subrogate Against The Landlord

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    Nevada’s Construction Defect Law

    My Top 5 Innovations for Greater Efficiency, Sustainability & Quality

    Motions to Dismiss, Limitations of Liability, and More

    President Trump Repeals Contractor “Blacklisting” Rule

    Defense Dept. IG: White House Email Stonewall Stalls Border Wall Contract Probe

    Herman Russell's Big Hustle

    SNC-Lavalin’s Former Head of Construction Pleads Guilty to Bribery, Money Laundering

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Lisa M. Rolle and Justyn Verzillo Win Motion for Summary Judgment

    Fifth Circuit: Primary Insurer Relieved of Duty to Defend Without Release of Liability of Insured

    Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs

    Federal Government Partial Shutdown – Picking Up the Pieces

    Happenings in and around the 2015 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Filing Motion to Increase Lien Transfer Bond (Before Trial Court Loses Jurisdiction Over Final Judgment)

    Mexico's Richest Man Carlos Slim to Rebuild Collapsed Subway Line

    Construction Law Client Advisory: What The Recent Beacon Decision Means For Developers And General Contractors

    Construction Defect Bill a Long Shot in Nevada

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    Court Adopts Magistrate's Recommendation to Deny Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    Insurance Broker Stole NY Contractor's Payment, Indictment Alleges

    New LG Headquarters Project Challenged because of Height

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Appeals Court Rules that Vertical and Not Horizontal Exhaustion Applies to Primary and First-Layer Excess Insurance

    University of Tennessee’s New Humanities Building Construction Set to Begin

    When is Forum Selection in a Construction Contract Enforceable?

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    The Hidden Price of Outdated Damage Prevention Laws: Part I

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    'Perfect Storm' Caused Fractures at San Francisco Transit Hub

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    Insurer Must Pay To Defend Product Defect Claims From Date Of Product Installation

    Tenth Circuit Finds Appraisal Can Decide Causation of Loss Under Colorado Law

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    Loaded Boom of Burning Tower Crane Collapses in Manhattan, Injuring Six

    Construction-Industry Clients Need Well-Reasoned and Clear Policies on Recording Zoom and Teams Meetings

    Green Energy Can Complicate Real Estate Foreclosures

    Be Sure to Bring Up Any Mechanic’s Lien Defenses Early and Often

    Construction Worker Dies after Building Collapse

    World-Famous Architects Design $480,000 Gazebos for Your Backyard

    New ANSI Requirements for Fireplace Screens

    Insurer’s Attempt to Shift Cost of Defense to Another Insurer Found Void as to Public Policy
    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

    TxDOT: Flatiron/Dragados Faces Default Over Bridge Design Issues

    September 12, 2022 —
    Texas officials are threatening to replace the contractor building a $930-million bridge crossing the Corpus Christi Ship Channel, alleging the firm has failed to address previously identified safety concerns with the design. In response, the contractor says the state has delayed sharing key engineering information and insists the design is safe. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Confirms Carrier Owes No Duty to Defend Against Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    April 05, 2021 —
    On March 17, 2021, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued its decision in Estate Chimney & Fireplace v. IFG Companies & Burlington Insurance Company, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50360 (E.D. Pa. March 17, 2021), finding that an insurance carrier had no duty to defend its insured where the allegations in the underlying litigation involved claims of faulty workmanship. Estates Chimney & Fireplace, LLC (Estates Chimney) had performed inspections and replaced chase covers for a number of chimneys in a condominium complex. Chase covers are pieces of metal, which are placed over chimneys in order to keep out environmental elements. Several condominium owners sued Estates Chimney, alleging that Estates Chimney had improperly installed, then improperly replaced, their chimney caps, which caused their chimneys to cease working properly. As a result, the underlying plaintiffs allegedly incurred costs to repair or replace the chimney caps and chimneys. Estates Chimney sought coverage from its carrier, who denied coverage based upon its determination that the claims in the underlying lawsuits arose out of faulty workmanship, which did not result in damage to the property of a third party. Estates Chimney filed a declaratory judgment action, seeking a declaration that it was entitled to coverage under the policy. Both parties moved for summary judgment, and the Eastern District ruled in favor of the carrier. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Marianne Bradley, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Bradley may be contacted at bradleym@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    August 02, 2017 —
    Some of the most viewed topics on this blog are those concerning double breasted company. That is a two separate firms, commonly owned, one that is a signatory to a union and the other that is merit shop. An issue frequently encountered with double breasted construction companies is an union arbitrator’s jurisdiction over the non-signatory firm. The issue usually goes something like this. A signatory employer’s collective bargaining agreement contains language prohibiting double breasting (which could be invalid). The collective bargaining agreement also contains an arbitration provision requiring all disputes concerning a breach of the agreement (a grievance) be decided by an arbitrator in private arbitration. The union files a demand for arbitration claiming that the union signatory has breached the collective bargaining agreement’s anti-dual shop provision. The union names the non-union firm as a party to the arbitration based on its status as an alleged “single employer.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    More Business Value from Drones with Propeller and Trimble – Interview with Rory San Miguel

    August 10, 2017 —
    Here’s my interview with Rory San Miguel, CEO of Propeller Aerobotics, a UAV tech company. We’re discussing the use of drones in construction and the company’s recently announced collaboration with Trimble to deliver efficient UAV workflows. You’re a co-founder of Propeller. How did your company come about? I met Francis (Propeller co-founder) in 2013 at a drone delivery startup called Flirtey. There we worked closely on drone technology as engineers but ultimately felt like there were nearer term revenue opportunities for drones in the mapping/surveying space. We quickly spun out to start Propeller and have focussed on making drone data easy for construction, mining, quarries and landfills since then. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at info@aepartners.fi

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    April 07, 2011 —

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011 (H. R. 1309) has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services—the first step in the legislative process. The bill, if passed, would extend the program to September 30, 2016. It is currently slated to be terminated September 30 of this year. The bill also contains changes to premium rates, mapping protocols, and privatization initiatives.

    H. R. 1309 has garnered the support of several Insurance organizations. Leigh Ann Pusey, president and CEO of the American Insurance Association (AIA), sent a letter of support to the Chair and Ranking member of the House Financial Services Subcommittee. “AIA has advocated for a long term reauthorization of the NFIP to protect consumers and help increase stability for real estate transactions and policyholders,” Pusey said. “AIA believes the five-year extension contained in HR 1309, will provide certainty in the flood program thereby increasing consumer and business confidence in the NFIP.”

    Jimi Grande, senior vice president of federal and political affairs for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) spoke out in support of the bill. “For the NFIP to survive, the prices for flood insurance must reflect the actual costs of flood risk for a property,” Grande said. “HR 1309 will provide that transparency. In addition, the Technical Mapping Advisory Council will give communities a voice in the flood mapping process, fostering a better understanding of what flood maps represent and how they are made.”

    Read H. R. 1309...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...
    Read the NAMIC Press Release...

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

    Court Affirms Summary Adjudication of Bad Faith Claim Where Expert Opinions Raised a Genuine Dispute

    July 06, 2020 —
    In 501 East 51st Street etc. v. Kookmin Best Ins. Co., Ltd. (No. B293605, filed 4/2/20, ordered pub. 4/16/20), a California appeals court affirmed summary adjudication and dismissal of a bad faith claim based on the genuine dispute doctrine. 501 East 51st Street Long-Beach-10, LLC (501) was the owner of a 10-unit apartment complex, insured by Kookmin Best. In 2017, an underground water main alongside the building burst which, according to 501, caused the building to move and crack. 501 made a claim and supplied a geotechnical report finding cracks in the foundation walls, cracks in the stucco and significant floor deformation and tilting near the water leak. The engineer’s opinion concluded that that “existing building distress was substantially contributed to by the water main break. The water introduced to the soil medium appears to have triggered differential foundation movement causing the stress features to develop.” Kookmin retained its own engineers to investigate, who returned an opinion that the leak had exacerbated long-term pre-existing settlement which would continue. Under the policy, damage to the building caused by earth movement and settlement were excluded, but water damage resulting from an “accidental discharge” of water was covered. Kookmin then obtained an opinion from coverage counsel, who opined that only damage allocable to the water leak would be covered. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Court-Side Seat: An End-of-Year Environmental Update

    January 09, 2023 —
    As 2022 draws to a close, here is a brief description of recent environmental and regulatory law rulings, as well as new federal rulemaking proceedings. United States Tax Court
    Green Valley Investors, LLC et al, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue On November 9, 2022, the Tax Court agreed with the taxpayers that the IRS’s use of administrative Notice 2017-10 to impose substantial tax liabilities violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The notice was the agency’s response to a provision in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 which increased the penalties for engaging in a reportable transaction understatement. Here, at issue was the value of charitable deductions generated by the creation of environmental easements made in connection with land transactions. These claimed deductions amounted to more than $60 million. The petitioners argued that IRS Notice 2017-10, which authorized such large penalties, was in fact a “legislative rule” whose promulgation should have complied with the notice and comment requirements of the APA. The agency contended that the Congress, by implication, absolved the IRS from the notice and comment requirements. The court agreed with the petitioners and set aside Notice 2017-10 and the imposition of penalties under Section 6662A of the Jobs Creation Act. On December 8, 2022, the IRS published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would correct the APA deficiencies noted by the courts. (See 87 FR 75185.)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    The Overlooked Nevada Rule In an Arena Project Lawsuit

    August 04, 2016 —
    When crunching the numbers on the construction wrap-up program for the T-Mobile Arena project outside Las Vegas, insurance broker Aon Risk Services South allegedly failed to take into account a Nevada workers’ compensation rule, one of many intricate features of the state’s workers’ compensation regulations. Others had apparently missed this aspect of the rule, too. “Many business owners and executives are unaware of this regulation and … are paying more premium to their workers’ compensation carriers than they should be,” warned Bradley Rowe, a commercial insurance broker in Las Vegas, in a blog post in 2014. Two years later, the prime contractor joint venture on the completed $230-million arena is battling in court with Aon, charging the broker with professional negligence and breach of contract, according to court documents filed in U.S. District Court in Nevada. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Scott Van Voorhis, Engineering News-Record
    You may send questions or comments to enr.com@bnpmedia.com