BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating 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


    New York Court Discusses Evidentiary Standards for Policy Rescission Based on Material Misrepresentation

    Sales of U.S. New Homes Decline After Record May Revision

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    Another Setback for the New Staten Island Courthouse

    Major Change to Residential Landlord Tenant Law

    What to Look for in Subcontractor Warranty Endorsements

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Rises for First Time in Two Years

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Ruling On Certificates Of Merit And “Gist Of Action” May Make It More Difficult For An Architect Or Engineer To Seek An Early Dismissal

    Factual Issues Prevent Summary Judgment Determination on Coverage for Additional Insured

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff

    9th Circuit Plumbs Through the Federal and State False Claims Acts

    Quick Note: Charting Your Contractual Rights With Respect To The Coronavirus

    North Carolina Weakened Its Building Codes in 2013

    Nondelegable Duty of Care Owed to Third Persons

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    There's No Such Thing as a Free House

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    Australians Back U.S. Renewables While Opportunities at Home Ebb

    Lump Sum Subcontract? Perhaps Not.

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    2013 May Be Bay Area’s Best Year for Commercial Building

    Who Will Pay for San Francisco's $750 Million Tilting Tower?

    Arkansas Federal Court Fans the Product Liability Flames Utilizing the Malfunction Theory

    Insurer's Attempt to Strike Experts in Collapse Case Fails

    Thanks to All for the 2024 Super Lawyers Nod!

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage Where Ordinary Negligence is Inseparably Intertwined With Professional Service

    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    Release Of “Unknown” Claim Does Not Bar Release Of “Unaccrued” Claim: Fair Or Unfair?

    A Brief Primer on Perfecting Your Mechanics Lien When the Property Owner Files Bankruptcy

    Massachusetts Federal Court Holds No Coverage for Mold and Water Damage Claim

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    School District Practice Bulletin: Loose Lips Can Sink More Than Ships

    Building on New Risks: Construction in the Age of Greening

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Luxury-Apartment Boom Favors D.C.’s Millennial Renters

    California Supreme Court Finds Vertical Exhaustion Applies to First-Level Excess Policies

    Cal/OSHA Approves COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards; Executive Order Makes Them Effective Immediately

    Eleventh Circuit Finds Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Construction Management Activities

    Subcontractors Must be Careful Providing Bonds when General Contractor Does Not

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Supreme Court of Idaho Rules That Substantial Compliance With the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act Suffices to Bring Suit

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    Unions Win Prevailing Wage Challenge Brought By Charter Cities: Next Stop The Supreme Court?

    Las Vegas’ McCarran Tower Construction Issues Delays Opening
    Corporate Profile

    FAIRFIELD CONNECTICUT BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Fairfield, Connecticut Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Fairfield, Connecticut

    Dispute Over Amount Insured Owes Public Adjuster Resolved

    January 14, 2025 —
    The court addressed a dispute over fees that the insureds allegedly owed the public adjuster. Public' Adjuster's, LLC v. Mark Gottesdiener & Co., et al., 2024 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2352 (Conn. Super. Ct. Nov. 6. 2024). The insureds owned an apartment building that was substantially damaged by a fire. The building was insured by Quincy Mutual Group. The insureds signed a Public Adjuster Employment Contract with The Public's Adjuster, LLC (Adjuster). The contract authorized Adjuster to negotiate the reimbursable damages with Quincy on the insureds' behalf. Adjuster was to recover 8 1/2% of any amounts received by the insureds. Because of the extent of the fire damage, the work of negotiating a settlement with Quincy proved to be complex. Adjuster meticulously prepared several detained written estimates to by submitted to Quincy. 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

    New World Cup Stadiums Failed at their First Trial

    March 12, 2014 —
    Problems abounded at the inaugural match at one of the new World Cup stadiums in Manaus, Brazil, reported The News Tribune. Problems also were reported at the Arena da Amazonia. Bathrooms weren’t completed, roofs leaked, and some fans were sold tickets for seats that didn’t exist. Furthermore “construction material could be seen in some places and many wheelchair fans had difficulties accessing their seats.” "This is a critical point that needs to be reevaluated, it can't happen again," said Miguel Capobiango, one of the officials in charge of World Cup preparations in Manaus, as quoted by The News Tribune. "But this is why we have these test events." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Trial Court's Award of Contractual Fees to Public Adjuster Overturned

    June 03, 2019 —
    A judgment awarding the public adjuster his compensation for work performed under contract was remanded for further proceedings by the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals. Joslin v Ota Camp-Makibaka Ass'n, 2019 Haw. App. LEXIS 155 (Haw. Ct. App. April 5, 2019). A fire destroyed the homeowners' residence on September 19, 2013. The property was subject to the bylaws of the Association of Apartment Owners of Ota Camp. The Association had a policy with Alterra Excess & Surplus Insurance Company and submitted a claim for all units damaged in the fire. The Association's adjuster came the following day to inspect the site. Separately, Robert Joslin, public adjuster, entered a contract with the homeowners to adjust their claim in exchange for twelve-percent of any insurance proceeds obtained. Over the next several months Joslin pursued insurance proceeds from Alterra on behalf of the homeowners. On December 18, 2013, Joslin filed a complaint with the Insurance Division arguing that Alterra had failed to timely make payments on the claim. On February 10, 2014, Alterra's third party administrator, Engle Martin & Associates, sent a check to Joslin for $231,940 made out to the Association, the homeowners and Joslin. 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

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    February 19, 2019 —
    In a recent case in Kentucky[1], a sub-tier subcontractor sued the general contractor and owner for failure to pay for extra work. At the trial, the court held the subcontractor was entitled to recover under the theories of implied contracts and unjust enrichment, even though the subcontract contained a “pay-if-paid” clause. All parties appealed. In particular, the general contractor asserted that the pay-if-paid provision in the subcontract precluded recovery by the subcontractor. The issue was petitioned to the Supreme Court of Kentucky. The question to be resolved by the Supreme Court of Kentucky was whether a pay-if-paid provision was enforceable as between a general contractor and subcontractor, and if so, whether the subcontractor could nevertheless pursue the owner directly for payment notwithstanding a lack of privity between the owner and subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    NAHB Examines Single-Family Detached Concentration Statistics

    April 01, 2014 —
    In the National Association of Builders’ (NAHB) publication Eye on Housing, the NAHB examined “the share of homeowners living in single-family detached housing” statistics as reported in the 2012 American Community Survey (ACS). Wausau, Wisconsin had the highest share of homeowners living in single-family detached housing within a metropolitan area. Interestingly, NAHB found that “[w]ith the exception of Modesto, CA, all of the metropolitan areas in the top ten [were] located in the Midwest.” The New York-White Plains-Wayne (New York) division had the lowest share of homeowners living in single-detached housing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Failure to Timely File Suit in Federal Court for Flood Loss is Fatal

    June 29, 2017 —
    Although the insureds timely filed their suit for denial of flood benefits in state court, the Fourth Circuit found the lawsuit against the Insurer was untimely because it was not filed in federal district court. Woodson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2017 U. S. App. LEXIS 7862 (4th Cir. May 3 , 2917). Hurricane Irene struck the insureds' house in August 27, 2011. Their property was flooded and for several hours, subjected to wave action, allegedly causing further damage to the home. The insureds contacted Allstate, who retained Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. to inspect the property. Rimkus found that, other than a substantial loss of soil washed away around the supporting portion of the house, there was no damage to the structure of the house. Rimkus recommended reimbursement of $1200 for the washed out soil. The insureds retained House Engineering, P.C., which submitted a report describing substantial damage caused by the hurricane, including movement to the pilings that caused the house to no longer be level. The insureds claimed $228,822 in damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly - Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    California Contractors: New CSLB Procedure Requires Non-California Corporations to Associate All Officers with Their Contractor’s License

    April 19, 2021 —
    As of July 1, 2020, “[e]very person who is an officer, member, responsible manager, or director of a corporation or limited liability company seeking licensure under this chapter shall be listed on the application as a member of the personnel of record,” and they must match those officers listed on California Secretary of State’s (SOS) records. (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7065 (b)(1)). This is a deviation from the Contractors State License Board’s (CSLB) past practice of requiring foreign corporations to associate as personnel of record only their president, in contrast to requiring domestic corporations to associate their president, secretary, and treasurer. Beware that the CSLB may discover that the licensee’s personnel of record are incomplete or incorrect when reviewing a license renewal application, because it will compare the SOS’s records to the license renewal application. A license renewal application requires the licensee to list its qualifier and personnel of record. If the SOS and CSLB records do not match, this could delay approval of the license renewal application until the missing personnel are added and fingerprinted. Reprinted courtesy of Amy Pierce, Lewis Brisbois, Mark Oertel, Lewis Brisbois and John Lubitz, Lewis Brisbois Ms. Pierce may be contacted at Amy.Pierce@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Oertel may be contacted at Mark.Oertel@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Lubitz may be contacted at John.Lubitz@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Oregon Supreme Court Confirms Broad Duty to Defend

    November 21, 2017 —
    Originally published by CDJ on January 13, 2017 The Supreme Court of Oregon issued a decision at the end of last year which perfectly illustrates the lengths to which a court may go to grant a contractor’s claim for defense from its insurer in a construction defect suit. In West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc.,1 the Court held that a subcontractor’s insurer had a duty to defend a general contractor as an additional insured because the allegations of a homeowner’s association’s complaint could be interpreted to fall within the ambit of coverage provided under the policy—despite the fact that the policy only provided ongoing operations coverage, and despite the fact that the subcontractor was never mentioned in the complaint. The decision is favorable to policyholders but also provides an important lesson: that contractors may avoid additional insured disputes if those contractors have solid contractual insurance requirements for both ongoing and completed operations risks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Theresa A. Guertin, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com