BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut expert witness structural engineerFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction 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


    No Friday Night Lights at $60 Million Texas Stadium: Muni Credit

    School District Settles Over Defective Athletic Field

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    Two Lawyers From Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group, Andrea DeField and Latosha Ellis, Selected for American Bar Association’s 2022 “On The Rise” Award

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)

    CDJ’s #4 Topic of the Year: KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County

    Homebuilding Design Goes 3D

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    Insurer's Daubert Challenge to Insured's Expert Partially Successful

    If Passed, New Bill AB 2320 Will Mandate Cyber Insurance For State Government Contractors

    More Fun with Indemnity and Construction Contracts!

    An Interesting Look at Mechanic’s Lien Priority and Necessary Parties

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (9/4/24) – DOJ Sues RealPage, Housing Sales Increase and U.S. Can’t Build Homes Fast Enough

    California MCLE Seminar at BHA Sacramento July 11th

    Design Professionals Owe a Duty of Care to Homeowners

    Bay Area Firm Offers Construction Consulting to Remodels

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Insurers Dispute Sharing of Defense in Construction Defect Case

    Substitutions On a Construction Project — A Specification Writer Responds

    Structural Health Check-Ups Needed but Are Too Infrequent

    General Contractors Can Be Sued by a Subcontractor’s Injured Employee

    Hail Damage Requires Replacement of Even Undamaged Siding

    Nevada Assembly Bill Proposes Changes to Construction Defect Litigation

    Examining Construction Defect as Occurrence in Recent Case Law and Litigation

    Toll Brothers Shows how the Affluent Buyer is Driving Up Prices

    The Evolution of Construction Defect Trends at West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Keeping KeyArena's Landmark Lid Overhead at Climate Pledge Arena Redevelopment Is A 22,000-Ton Balancing Act

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Associated Builders and Contractors Northern California Chapter Announces New President/CEO

    Claim Against Broker for Failure to Procure Adequate Coverage Survives Summary Judgment

    An Uncharted Frontier: Nevada First State to Prohibit Defense-Within-Limits Provisions

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Kahana & Feld P.C. Enhances Client Offerings, Expands Litigation Firm Leadership

    Engineers Found ‘Hundreds’ of Cracks in California Bridge

    Nine ACS Lawyers Recognized as Super Lawyers – Including One Top 10 and Three Top 100 Washington Attorneys

    Understanding Indiana’s New Home Construction Warranty Act

    New Jersey Firm’s Fee Action Tossed for not Filing Substitution of Counsel

    A Tort, By Any Other Name, is Just a Tort: Massachusetts Court Bars Contract Claims That Sound in Negligence

    Lumber Drops to Nine-Month Low, Extending Retreat From Record

    Norfolk Southern Accused of Trying to Destroy Evidence of Ohio Wreck

    Insurer Unable to Declare its Coverage Excess In Construction Defect Case

    Risk Management for Condominium Conversions

    Haight Welcomes New Attorneys to Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco

    Nevada Update: Nevada Commissioner of Insurance Updates Burning Limits Statute with Emergency Regulation

    Tarriffs, a Pandemic and War: Construction Contracts Must Withstand the Unforeseeable
    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

    “License and Registration, Please.” The Big Risk of Getting Busted for Working without a Proper Contractor’s License

    July 25, 2021 —
    The need for contractors to maintain the proper contracting license may seem like a mundane, clerical detail, and generally is just that. If, however, the contractor ignores or mishandles paperwork and the proper license is not in hand, licensing may go from a mundane, clerical detail to a financial catastrophe. An unlicensed contractor may be barred from asserting claims or collecting payments for work already performed; the contractor may even be required to return payments for unlicensed work performed. A recent case in Georgia, a state that had no state-wide general contractor’s license requirement in effect until 2008 illustrates the risk of unlicensed work.[1] In Saks Management and Associates, LLC v. Sung General Contracting, Inc.,[2] the court ruled that without a license the general contractor did not have the right to enforce a contract. The contractor’s claims for payment failed, and the mundane, clerical error led a major financial loss. This disastrous result for the Georgia contractor is far from an outlier, and is a real risk in many states. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher A. Henry, Jones Walker LLP and Mia Hughes, Jones Walker LLP Mr. Henry may be contacted at chenry@joneswalker.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Home Prices Up, Inventory Down

    February 04, 2013 —
    "Housing is clearly recovering," David Blitzer of Standard & Poor told USA Today. Standard & Poor issued their Case-Shiller Index of home sale prices for November. In their review of twenty metropolitan areas, prices rose in all but one area. In the report for October, housing overall saw a 0.1% decline with gains only in ten cities. The article attributes this in part to that the inventory of unsold homes was 4.4 months, which was the lowest since May 2005. "Any new listings are getting eaten up right away," said E. J. Bowlds, a broker at Coldwell Banker Bain. He is seeing six to ten competing offers on homes in his area of Washington State. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claims Against Contractor

    March 19, 2014 —
    The U. S. District Court found there was no coverage for breach of contract claims against the contractor who walked off the job before completing the project. Pa. Nat'l Mut. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Snider, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16920 (M.D. Ala. Feb. 11, 2014). The homeowners hired Jeff Beale to build their home for an approximate cost of $650,000. Beale said the job would take six to eight months and construction would be completed in early 2005. Construction did not begin, however, until April 2005. By 2005, the homeowners were becoming increasing displeased with Beale's progress. By March 2006, construction costs were approaching $800,000 and the home was not completed. The homeowners made progress payments on a monthly basis. Beale did not return to the home after April 2006 and another contractor was hired to complete the job. When the homeowners moved in, they discovered several construction defects, including a cracked retaining wall and water intrusion in many areas of the home. They paid over $150,000 to repair the defects, to complete work Beale left unfinished, and remove mold. 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

    Liability Insurer’s Duty To Defend Insured Is Broader Than Its Duty To Indemnify

    June 03, 2019 —
    When it comes to liability insurance, an insurer’s duty to defend its insured from a third-party claim is much broader than its duty to indemnify. This broad duty to defend an insured is very important and, as an insured, you need to know this. “A liability insurer’s obligation, with respect to its duty to defend, is not determined by the insured’s actual liability but rather by whether the alleged basis of the action against the insurer falls within the policy’s coverage.” Advanced Systems, Inc. v. Gotham Ins. Co., 44 Fla. L. Weekly D996b (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (internal quotation omitted). This means: Even where the complaint alleges facts partially within and partially outside the coverage of a policy, the insurer is nonetheless obligated to defend the entire suit, even if the facts later demonstrate that no coverage actually exists. And, the insurer must defend even if the allegations in the complaint are factually incorrect or meritless. As such, an insurer is obligated to defend a claim even if it is uncertain whether coverage exists under the policy. Furthermore, once a court finds that there is a duty to defend, the duty will continue even though it is ultimately determined that the alleged cause of action is groundless and no liability is found within the policy provisions defining coverage. Advanced Systems, supra(internal citations and quotations omitted). 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

    Apartments pushed up US homebuilding in September

    October 22, 2014 —
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Construction firms broke ground on more apartment complexes in September, pushing up the pace of U.S. homebuilding. Housing starts rose 6.3 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.017 million homes, the Commerce Department said Friday. Almost all of the gains came from apartment construction — a volatile category — which increased 18.5 percent after plunging in August. The sluggish recovery and meager wage growth has left more Americans renting instead of owning homes. Apartment construction has surged 30.3 percent over the past 12 months. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Josh Boak, Bloomberg Businessweek

    Insurer Must Pay for Matching Siding of Insured's Buildings

    December 02, 2019 —
    The Seventh Circuit found that the insurer was obligated to pay for siding of a building that was not damaged by hail so that it matched the replaced damaged portions of the siding. Windridge of Naperville Condominium Association v. Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co., 2019 U.S. App. 23607 (7th Cir. Aug. 7, 2019). A hail and wind storm damaged buildings owned by Windridge. The storm physically damaged the aluminum siding on the buildings' sought and west sides. Philadelphia Indemnity, Windridge's insurer, contended that it was only required to replace the siding on those sides. Windridge argued that replacement siding that matched the undamaged north and east elevations was no longer available, so Philadelphia had to replace the siding on all four sides of the buildings to that all of the siding matched. Windridge sued and moved for summary judgment. The district court ruled that matching was required. The only sensible result was to treat the damage as having occurred to the building's siding as a whole. The policy was a replacement-cost policy. Philadelphia promised to "pay for direct physical 'loss' to 'Covered Property' caused by or resulting from" the storm, with the amount of loss being "the cost to replace the lost or damaged property with other property . . . of comparable material and quality . . . and . . . used for the same purpose." The loss payment provision offered four different measures for loss, leaving Philadelphia free to choose the least expensive: (1) pay the value of the lost or damaged property; (2) pay the cost of repairing or replacing the lost or damaged property; (3) take all or any part of the property at an agreed or appraised value; or (4) repair, rebuild or replace the property with other property of like kind and quality. 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

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    September 24, 2014 —
    The 160 units at Santa Monica, California’s Belmar Apartments received 4,600 applications ahead of the project’s July opening, a measure of the competition for scarce affordable housing. The Related Cos. project, where two-bedroom units rent for $946 a month, is among the last built with financing from redevelopment agencies, the taxpayer-backed programs that Governor Jerry Brown eliminated three years ago to help balance California’s budget. Without that source of $1 billion a year, the state’s supply of funds for building low- and moderate-income housing is running dry as real estate prices surge. “The abolishment of the redevelopment agencies by Governor Brown is the single biggest problem” for affordable housing, said William Witte, president of Related’s California division, which also is seeking buyers for condominiums next to Belmar with an average price of $2.4 million. “Since there’s little to no help from the federal government, the loss of redevelopment funds is devastating.” Mr. Gittelsohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net; Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Gittelsohn and Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    September 28, 2020 —
    In Greater Mutual Insurance Company v. Continental Casualty Company, 2020 WL 5370419 (S.D.N.Y. September 8, 2020), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York had occasion to consider the “other insurance” provisions of a commercial general liability policy, issued by Greater Mutual Insurance Company (“GNY”), and a directors and officers (“D&O”) policy, issued by Continental, to the same insured. The GNY policy covered, inter alia, property damage caused by an occurrence, as well as “personal advertising injury,” defined to include “[t]he wrongful eviction from, wrongful entry into, or invasion of the right of private occupancy of a room, dwelling or premises that a person occupies, committed by or on behalf of its owner, landlord or lessor.” The Continental D&O policy covered claims for wrongful acts, including “wrongful entry or eviction, or other invasion of the right to private occupancy. . . .” Unlike the GNY policy, however, the Continental policy expressly excluded coverage for damage to tangible property. In the underlying action, the plaintiffs alleged that the insured engaged in construction work to fix a leak from a terrace on the seventeenth floor. In doing so, the insured accessed the plaintiffs’ roof terrace. The plaintiffs alleged that the construction workers installed and stored construction materials on the roof terrace, making the plaintiffs unable to access the terrace. Plaintiffs also alleged that their deck furniture may have suffered damage, and that the workers had a “direct line of sight” into their unit, resulting in the plaintiffs having to leave their unit frequently. Causes of action were for property damage, constructive eviction, partial constructive eviction, and invasion of privacy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Rokuson, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Rokuson may be contacted at crokuson@tlsslaw.com