BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut window expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut stucco expert witnessFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness windowsFairfield Connecticut soil failure 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


    Wyoming Supreme Court Picks a Side After Reviewing the Sutton Rule

    A Relatively Small Exception to Fraud and Contract Don’t Mix

    Bad Faith Claim for Investigation Fails

    ENR Northwest’s Top Contractors Survey Reveals Regional Uptick

    Expert Can be Questioned on a Construction Standard, Even if Not Relied Upon

    North Dakota Universities Crumble as Oil Cash Pours In

    Understanding Liability Insurer’s Two Duties: To Defend and to Indemnify

    No Coverage for Alleged Misrepresentation Claim

    Nebraska Court Ruling Backs Latest Keystone XL Pipeline Route

    Auburn Woods Homeowners Association v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    US Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Chicago Cubs Stadium Renovation

    California’s Housing Costs Endanger Growth, Analyst Says

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    Traub Lieberman Partner Rina Clemens Selected as a 2023 Florida Super Lawyers® Rising Star

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Marlena Ellis Makes The Lawyers of Color Hot List of 2022

    The Utility of Arbitration Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Questions to Texas Supreme Court on Concurrent Causation Doctrine

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    North Carolina Weakened Its Building Codes in 2013

    Alabama “occurrence” and subcontractor work exception to the “your completed work” exclusion

    Get Construction Defects in Writing

    Balfour Taps Qinetiq’s Quinn as new CEO to Revamp Builder

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    In Louisiana, Native Americans Struggle to Recover From Ida

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    Boston Contractor Faces More OSHA Penalties

    Nevada Senate Rejects Construction Defect Bill

    Just Because You Allege There Was an Oral Contract Doesn’t Mean You’re Off the Hook for Attorneys’ Fees if you Lose

    Cogently Written Opinion Finds Coverage for Loss Caused By Defective Concrete

    Checking the Status of your Contractor License During Contract Work is a Necessity: The Expanded “Substantial Compliance” under B&P 7031 is Here

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    Construction Lien Does Not Include Late Fees Separate From Interest

    Infrastructure Money Comes With Labor Law Strings Attached

    Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured

    Overtime! – When the Statute of Limitations Isn’t Game Over For Your Claim

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    RDU Terminal 1: Going Green

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Repairs to Hurricane-damaged Sanibel Causeway Completed in 105 Days

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    Adaptive Reuse: Creative Reimagining of Former Office Space to Address Differing Demands

    Learning from Production Homes of the Past

    Even with LEED, Clear Specifications and Proper Documentation are Necessary

    Massachusetts Appellate Court Confirms Construction Defects are Not Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policies

    Drones Give Inspectors a Closer Look at Bridges

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!
    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

    A Community Constantly on the Brink of Disaster

    February 06, 2023 —
    In the beautiful coastline region along the famous Pacific Coast Highway between Ventura and Santa Barbara rests the small cottage town of La Conchita. With unobstructed ocean views, this community is only 820 feet wide on a narrow strip of land abutting a 590 feet high cliffside bluff. The bluff has a slope of approximately 35 degrees and consists of poorly cemented marine sediments. This is the perfect recipe for constant disaster from a geological perspective and the site of several major landslides that have devastated this community. Geologic evidence indicates that landslides, which are part of the larger Rincon Mountain slides, have been occurring at and near La Conchita for many thousands of years up to the present with reported landslides beginning as early as 1865. In both 1889 and 1909, the Southern Pacific Rail Line running along the coast was inundated. In the 1909 slide, a train was buried. Since that time, other slides have occurred, covering at times cultivated land, roadways, and the community itself. The two most devastating landslides occurred in 1995 and 2005. 1995 Landslide From October 1994-March 1995, there was double the amount of seasonal rainfall for the area – in excess of 30 inches. The slide occurred on March 3, 1995, when surface cracks in the upper part of the slope opened on the hillside, and surface runoff was infiltrating into the subsurface. The heavy rains essentially saturated the slope causing a massive slide. On March 4, 1995, the hill behind La Conchita failed, moving tens of meters in minutes, and buried nine homes with no loss of life. The County of Ventura immediately declared the whole community a Geological Hazard Area, imposing building restrictions on the community to restrict new construction. On March 10, 1995, a subsequent debris flow from a canyon to the northwest damaged five additional houses in the northwestern part of La Conchita. In total, the slide measured approximately 390 feet wide, 1080 feet long and 98 feet deep. The deposit covered approximately 9.9 acres, and the volume was estimated to be approximately 1.7 million cubic yards of sediment. The devastation was immeasurable and the damage to homes, property and infrastructure was in the millions of dollars to repair. Litigation quickly arose following the 1995 slide with seventy-one homeowners suing the La Conchita Ranch Co. in Bateman v. La Conchita Ranch Co. The judge ruled that irrigation was not the major cause of the slide and that the ranch owners were not responsible. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Daniel Feld, Kahana Feld
    Mr. Feld may be contacted at jfeld@kahanafeld.com

    Tropical Storms Pile Up Back-to-Back-to-Back Out West

    September 17, 2014 —
    Tropical Storm Polo, the 16th storm of an unusually active eastern Pacific hurricane season, is on a path eerily like that of Odile, which blasted the Baja California peninsula earlier this week. Odile went ashore late Sept. 14 with top winds of 125 miles (201 kilometers) per hour, the strongest storm to hit the region since 1967. As its winds swept the resort city of Cabo San Lucas, it was a Category 3 storm on the five-step Saffir-Simpson scale and a major hurricane. At its peak, hours before landfall, Odile’s winds reached 135 mph, Category 4-force. Photos from Mexico’s Baja California Sur show houses destroyed, hotels piled with debris and gaping holes in the local airport. At least 30,000 tourists were stranded. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian K. Sullivan, Bloomberg
    Mr. Sullivan may be contacted at bsullivan10@bloomberg.net

    Packard Condominiums Settled with Kosene & Kosene Residential

    August 27, 2014 —
    Residents of the Packard Condominiums in Indianapolis, Indiana “have settled a two-year-old lawsuit with developer Kosene & Kosene Residential,” according to the Indianapolis Business Journal. The Homeowners association stated that “the agreement would lead to repayment of a construction loan and avoidance of a special assessment on residents.” The association claimed to have spent “$3 million on ‘renovation and remediation’ of subpar construction of the condo building,” reported the Indianapolis Business Journal. The article also declared that at least 25 subcontractors participated in the mediation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    February 24, 2020 —
    Is the enforceability of a no-damage-for-delay provision inappropriate for resolution on a summary judgment? The recent decision in U.S. f/u/b/o Kingston Environmental Services, Inc. v. David Boland, Inc., 2019 WL 6178676 (D. Hawaii 2019), dealing with Florida law, suggests that it is inappropriate for a summary judgment resolution, particularly when there is a right to a jury trial. In this case, a prime contractor was hired on a federal construction project in Hawaii. The prime contractor hired a subcontractor and the subcontractor sued the prime contractor and its surety under the Miller Act. Of interest, the subcontractor was seeking to recover for the costs it incurred due to construction delays. The prime contractor moved for summary judgment as to the no-damage-for-delay provision in the subcontract. The no-damages-for-delay provision read as follows (and it is a well-written no-damage-for-delay provision): The Subcontractor expressly agrees that the Contractor shall not be liable to the Subcontractor for any damages or additional costs, whether foreseeable or unforeseeable, resulting in whole or in part from a delay, hindrance, suspension, or acceleration of the commencement or execution of the Work, caused in whole or in part by the acts or omissions, whether negligent or not, of the Contractor including other subcontractors or material suppliers to the Project, its agents, employees, or third parties acting on behalf of the Contractor. The Subcontractor’s sole remedy for any such delay, hindrance, suspension, or acceleration shall be a noncompensable time extension. 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

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    December 11, 2018 —
    Earlier this month, in Frederick Mutual Insurance Company v. Hall, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that coverage for faulty workmanship claims is “simply not the kind of coverage insurance agents and insurance companies expect to provide” to construction industry professionals “unless the insured explicitly requests such coverage.” 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31666, at *9 (3d Cir. Nov. 8, 2018). In Hall, a stone masonry contractor was sued by its customer for causing over $350,000 in property damage resulting from “substandard and defective work” performed on the customer’s residence. The insurer sought a declaration that it owed neither a defense nor indemnity for those damages because, under Pennsylvania law, the policy did not cover property damage caused by faulty workmanship. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Timothy Carroll, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Carroll may be contacted at carrollt@whiteandwilliams.com

    Did Deutsche Make a Deal with the Wrong Homeowner?

    September 03, 2014 —
    Deutsche Bank wants “to void a loan modification it claims resulted in a $125,000 discount on the wrong homeowners' outstanding mortgage,” according to the New Jersey Law Journal. Furthermore, even though the Deutsche Bank “obtained a default judgment a year ago… a New Jersey federal judge is currently considering the homeowners' motion to vacate it, most recently ordering a hearing to determine whether the couple was properly served.” According to the complaint, the Deutsche Bank claims that “its mortgage servicer, Ocwen Loan Servicing, mistakenly offered the modification to Lorraine and Raymond Lindsey of Franklinville, N.J., though the terms of the deal were intended for other homeowners in connection with a loan held by a different bank.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Keeping Your Workers Safe When Air Quality Isn't

    August 21, 2023 —
    Kim Ritchie, Vice President, Canada, ISN Construction Executive Q&A What risks do wildfires and poor air quality pose to workers? Exposure to smoke caused by wildfires can have significant health risks, especially for those with preexisting medical conditions. Smoke exposure and poor air quality can trigger immediate effects such as coughing, difficulty breathing and irritation of the throat, eyes and lungs. However, despite smoke dissipating, it could have long-term health complications with cardiovascular impacts, such as heart attacks and stroke. With the lasting impacts caused by exposure to wildfire smoke and poor air quality, it's essential for organizations to look out for their workers’ long-term health. Reprinted courtesy of Kim Ritchie, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mold Due to Construction Defects May Temporarily Close Fire Station

    October 25, 2013 —
    Fire Station 5 in Chino, California is about to undergo mold remediation. Ruben Martinez, the city’s Public Works Director, expects the station to be closed during remediation. “We’d like to get the firemen out of there so there isn’t any potential infection or worker’s compensation issues,” he said. However, Fire Department Captain Steve Harrison did not think the station needed to be closed. “We are adamant the station stays staffed while the remediation work is completed.” The mold came about due to problems the station has had with roof leaks since its opening in 1999. The current set of repairs will cost between $12,000 and $25,000, and the city is discussing matters with its insurer to determine who will pay for the repairs. It’ won’t be the original contractor, as the building is past the 10-year limit for construction defect claims. Even if a claim were possible, the contractor who built the building is bankrupt. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of