BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut architectural engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut fenestration expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projects
    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


    Be Careful with Mechanic’s Lien Waivers

    Surety Bond Producers Keep Eye Out For Illegal Waivers

    There Was No Housing Bubble in 2008 and There Isn’t One Now

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    Wisconsin Federal Court Addresses Scope Of Appraisal Provision In Rental Dwelling Policy

    Insureds Survive Summary Judgment on Coverage for Hurricane Loss

    Stick to Your Guns on Price and Pricing with Construction Contracts

    New Survey Reveals Present-Day Risks of Asbestos Exposure in America - 38% in High-Risk Jobs, 47% Vulnerable through Second-Hand Exposure

    Did New York Zero Tolerance Campaign Improve Jobsite Safety?

    Home Buyers Lose as U.S. Bond Rally Skips Mortgage Rates

    Not So Fast, My Friend: Pacing and Concurrent Delay

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    Mendocino Hospital Nearing Completion

    NYC’s Developers Plow Ahead With Ambitious Plans to Reshape City

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    Experts: Best Bet in $300M Osage Nation Wind Farm Dispute Is Negotiation

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Construction Firms Complain of Missed Payments on Redevelopment Project

    Nomos LLP Partners Recognized in Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    Fall 2024 Legislative Update:

    Who's Who Legal Recognizes Two White and Williams Lawyers as Thought/Global Leaders in Insurance and Reinsurance

    The One New Year’s Resolution You’ll Want to Keep if You’re Involved in Public Works Projects

    California Contractor Spills Coffee on Himself by Failing to Stay Mechanics Lien Action While Pursuing Arbitration

    Weyerhaeuser Leaving Home Building Business

    Temporary Obstructions Are a Permanent Problem Under the Americans with Disabilities Act

    City and Contractor Disclaim Responsibility for Construction Error that Lead to Blast

    Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs

    Whether Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is an Occurrence Creates Ambiguity

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    Several Lewis Brisbois Partners Recognized by Sacramento Magazine in List of Top Lawyers

    OSHA’s Multi-Employer Citation Policy: What Employers on Construction Sites Need to Know

    CA Supreme Court: Right to Repair Act (SB 800) is the Exclusive Remedy for Residential Construction Defect Claims – So Now What?

    Proximity Trace Used to Monitor, Maintain Social Distancing on $1.9-Billion KCI Airport Project

    John Paulson’s $1 Billion Caribbean Empire Faces Betrayal

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached

    Orange County Team Obtains Unanimous Defense Verdict in Case Involving Failed Real Estate Transaction

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    CDJ’s #7 Topic of the Year: The Las Vegas Harmon Hotel Year-Long Demolition & Trial Begins

    Renters Who Bought Cannot Sue for Construction Defects

    Venue for Miller Act Payment Bond When Project is Outside of Us

    Despite Increased Presence in Construction, Women Lack Size-Appropriate PPE

    Construction Termination Issues for the Architect and Engineer: Part 1– Introduction to the Series

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Louisiana Couple Claims Hurricane Revealed Construction Defects

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Kept Climbing in January

    Include Materials Price Escalation Clauses in Construction Clauses

    Court Holds That Self-Insured Retentions Exhaust Vertically And Awards Insured Mandatory Prejudgment Interest in Stringfellow Site Coverage Dispute

    Singer Akon’s Multibillion-Dollar Futuristic City in Africa Gets Final Notice
    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. Drawing 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

    UK Agency Seeks Stricter Punishments for Illegal Wastewater Discharges

    August 07, 2022 —
    Bosses of U.K. water and wastewater utilities that are responsible for illegal, serious pollution should be jailed, said Emma Howard Boyd, head of the government's Environment Agency. She made the recommendation along with release of the agency’s annual report on the nine major companies, which recorded the worst environmental performance in a decade. Reprinted courtesy of Peter Reina, Engineering News-Record Mr. Reina may be contacted at reina@btinternet.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Penalty for Failure to Release Expired Liens

    April 02, 2024 —
    I was recently contacted by a commercial building owner in the process of trying to sell his building. Two years prior to this, a subcontractor had recorded a mechanics’ lien with the local County Recorder’s office in relation to the owner’s property. The subcontractor recorded the mechanics lien after the subcontractor was not paid by a prime contractor for work the subcontractor had performed on the property. Unfortunately, the subcontractor then failed to file a lawsuit to foreclose on the lien within the requisite ninety (90) day time period for filing a lawsuit to foreclose on the mechanics’ lien. Since the subcontractor missed this 90 day deadline to file the mechanics lien foreclosure lawsuit, the mechanics lien expired and became unenforceable. Subject to certain exceptions, under California Civil Code Section 8460, a lawsuit to foreclose on a mechanics lien must be filed within ninety (90) days after the mechanics lien is recorded or the mechanics lien expires. Although the mechanics lien had expired, the title company and intended purchaser of the building and property were perhaps understandably insistent that the mechanics lien constituted a cloud on title to the property and must be removed from the official records for the property. The prospective purchaser would not buy the property unless the mechanics’ lien was removed. 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

    Home Construction Slows in Las Vegas

    November 27, 2013 —
    Although home builders in the Las Vegas area are doing better than they were in 2012, growth is still slow and October saw a decline in the sale of new homes. However, as with other areas, the average home price actually increased over prior months, despite the cooling off the actual number of sales. Taken as a whole though, 2013 looks a lot better than 2012, with 44% more homes sold this year. Dennis Smith, the president of Home Builders Research said that 2013 “will be remembered as ‘the year of recovery,’” but added that “there is still a long path ahead for everyone to feel a sense of comfort.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    January 06, 2012 —

    A post on the blog of Liberty Building Forensics Group find fault with the New Jersey Home Warranty and Builders’ Registration Act for not being stringent enough. The poster notes the coverage given under the bill. In the first year, builders are responsible to remedy faulty workmanship and materials and major structural defects. While other protections expire in the first or second year, there is a ten year coverage of major construction defects.

    The blogger finds fault with the exclusion New Jersey law places on these claims, arguing that “due to the stringent definition of ‘major construction defects,” the warranty affords no coverage unless the house is practically collapsing.” The bill excludes leaks, cracks, and mold, and further limits claims if the homeowner has failed to inform the builder or insurer of defects, failure to maintain the home, and alterations made by the homeowner.

    The intent of the New Jersey law is given as “requiring that newly constructed homes conform to certain construction and quality standards as well as to provide buyers of new homes with insurance-backed warranty protection in the event such standards are not met.” It’s argued in the piece that it instead serves to “strip homeowners of any meaningful means of recovery for discovered construction defects.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    November 01, 2021 —
    The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s opinion in Pelaez v. Government Employees Insurance Company, 2021 WL 4258821 (11th Cir. 2021) is a non-construction case that discusses the standard for pursuing a bad faith claim against an insurer. This case dealt with an automobile accident. While the facts of the case are interesting and will be discussed, the takeaway is the Eleventh Circuit’s noteworthy discussion on the standard for bad faith claims and how they should be evaluated. This discussion is included below–with citations–because while the term “bad faith” is oftentimes thrown around when it comes to insurance carriers, there is indeed an evaluative standard that is applied to determine whether an insurance carrier acted in bad faith. In Pelaez, a high school student driving a car crashed with a motorcycle. The motorcycle driver was seriously injured and airlifted to the hospital. The accident was reported to the automobile liability insurer of the driver of the car. The insurer through its investigation initially believed the motorcycle driver was contributory negligent. Eleven days after the crash, after learning additional information, the insurer tendered its bodily injury policy limits of $50,00 to the motorcycle driver even though it never received a settlement demand. The insurer sent a tender package to the motorcycle driver’s lawyer that included a $50,000 check for the bodily injury claim and a proposed release. The accompanying letter told the attorney to contact the insurer with any questions about the release and to edit the proposed release with suggested changes. The insurer also wanted to inspect the motorcycle in furtherance of adjusting the property damage claim which also had a policy limit of $50,000. A location of where the motorcycle could be inspected was never provided. 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

    Improper Classification Under Davis Bacon Can Be Costly

    April 01, 2015 —
    The Department of Labor announced late last year that it had recovered nearly $2 million in back wages and fringe benefits from a subcontractor that provided constructions services at the federally funded Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project in the Nevada desert. This was not a failure to pay Davis Bacon wages, but a failure to properly classify laborers on the project. The DOL determined that the laborers should have been paid as skilled trade steelworkers, not general laborers. As the subcontractor found out, this proved very costly. The subcontractor submitted its bid, classifying its laborers as general laborers and designating their wage at $30.00. The laborers were to assemble billboard sized mirrors on the project. There is some indication that the Department of Energy agreed with the classification, even though the Department of Labor has the final say on classifications. The Department of Labor’s investigation revealed that the laborers routinely performed duties in skilled trades, such as ironworking, electrical work, painting or bridge crane operation. Based on these activities, the Department of Labor concluded that the laborers should have been paid $60.00 per hour plus fringe benefits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Harmon Towers

    June 28, 2013 —
    The Nevada Supreme Court started hearings on Tuesday, June 4 over the fate of Harmon towers. MGM Resorts is hoping to obtain permission from the court to tear down the tower, which they claim could collapse should an earthquake strike Las Vegas. Perini Corp, the builder, wants the building to remain standing in order to support their claim that the building’s flaws are through design and not construction errors. KLAS quoted one of Perini’s lawyers claiming that MGM had pursued a media strategy to prejudice potential jurors against the contractor. “CityCenter hired Cedric and Bunting to place advertisements with the media to win the hearts and minds of the community and to convince the public pretrial that Perini was, quote, ‘scum of the earth.’” If the Supreme Court gives the go-ahead, demolition would begin soon. Still pending, is the $500 lawsuit over the allegations of construction defects. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    August 20, 2018 —
    Earlier this summer, in Gables & Villas at River Oaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Castlewood Builders LLC, 2018 UT 28, the Supreme Court of Utah addressed the question of whether the plaintiff’s construction defects claims against the general contractor for a construction project were timely-filed, or barred by the statute of repose. In Utah, the statute of repose requires that an action be “commenced within six years of the date of completion.” The plaintiff alleged that its 2014 amended complaint naming the general contractor as a defendant was timely-commenced because, before the date on which Utah’s statute of repose ran, a defendant filed a motion to amend its third-party complaint to name the general contractor as a defendant, and the defendant subsequently assigned its claims to the plaintiff. The plaintiff argued that the filing of its 2014 amended complaint related back[1] to the date of its original complaint. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that an action is “commenced” by filing a complaint and that a motion for leave to amend does not count as “commencing” an action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shannon M. Warren, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Warren may be contacted at warrens@whiteandwilliams.com