BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut OSHA expert witness constructionFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut eifs expert witnessFairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness roofingFairfield Connecticut consulting architect 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


    Court Reminds Insurer that the Mere Possibility Of Coverage at the Time of Tender Triggers a Duty to Defend in a Defect Action

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    The Firm Hits the 9 Year Mark!

    Duty to Defend Bodily Injury Evolving Over Many Policy Periods Prorated in Louisiana

    Spreading Cracks On FIU Bridge Failed to Alarm Project Team

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Extreme Rainfall Is Becoming More Frequent and Deadly

    EPA Will Soon Issue the Latest Revision to the Risk Management Program (RMP) Chemical Release Rules

    One Word Makes All The Difference – The Distinction Between “Pay If Paid” and “Pay When Paid” Clauses

    Angels Among Us

    Question of Parties' Intent Prevents Summary Judgment for Insurer

    Happenings in and around the 2015 West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Meet Some Key Players in 2020 Environmental Litigation

    San Francisco Bucks U.S. Trend With Homeownership Gains

    Gehry-Designed Project Seen Bringing NYC Vibe to L.A.

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    Beam Cracks Cause Closure of San Francisco’s New $2B Transit Center

    David M. McLain named Law Week Colorado’s 2015 Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants

    Former Trump Atlantic City Casino Set for February Implosion

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Indemnification Provisions Do Not Create Reciprocal Attorney’s Fees Provisions

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    Call to Conserve Power Raises Questions About Texas Grid Reliability

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Haight’s 2020 San Diego Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Boots on the Ground- A Great Way to Learn and Help Construction Clients

    President Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” Executive Order and the Construction Industry

    Common Construction Contract Provisions: Indemnity Provisions

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    Alabama Appeals Court Rules Unexpected and Unintended Property Damage is an Occurrence

    The Texas Storm – Guidance for Contractors

    Florida Condos Bet on Americans Making 50% Down Payments

    Green Construction Claims: More of the Same

    The Unthinkable Has Happened. How Should Contractors Respond?

    Commercial Construction in the Golden State is Looking Pretty Golden

    Slow Down?

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Pensacola Bridge Repair Plan Grows as Inspectors Uncover More Damage

    Is Settling a Bond Claim in the Face of a Seemingly Clear Statute of Limitations Defense Bad Faith?

    Banks Rejected by U.S. High Court on Mortgage Securities Suits

    Baltimore Project Pushes To Meet Federal Deadline

    A Court-Side Seat: Appeals and Agency Developments at the Close of 2020
    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

    Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Calls for CFPB Investigation into Tenant Screening Businesses

    December 13, 2021 —
    Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, has written to newly confirmed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra, asking him to review companies in the tenant screening industry for possible Fair Credit Reporting Act violations and other violations of U.S. laws. The CFPB, for its part, has already published a bulletin alerting Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs) and other furnishers of consumer information that, as federal, state and local pandemic-related housing protections expire, the Bureau will be giving greater enforcement focus to these businesses’ compliance with accuracy and dispute obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Regulation V. While it is still unclear whether Director Chopra will direct the Bureau to investigate specific businesses flagged by Chairman Brown, the tenant screening industry will likely face increased scrutiny in the coming months, which may impact their service offerings and cause interruptions for landlords relying on these businesses and services. There are approximately 2,000 tenant screening companies across the United States. These companies are used by landlords to better identify and perform background checks on prospective tenants. These reports typically provide a prospective tenant’s rental and eviction histories, credit score, debt-to-income ratio, and outstanding credit obligations, among other financial metrics. The reports also usually include a criminal background check, including searches of sex offender registries and other public records searches. Many tenant screening companies then use this information to provide an estimate of the risk that each tenant presents, calculated through proprietary algorithmic formulas. These reports are usually available to landlords at a cost ranging from approximately $5 to $55 per report, usually passed through to the prospective tenant through application fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian H. Montgomery, Pillsbury
    Mr. Montgomery may be contacted at brian.montgomery@pillsburylaw.com

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    August 21, 2023 —
    In Nationwide Prop & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Fireline Corp., No. 1:20-cv-00684, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104241, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (District Court) considered whether the events giving rise to the plaintiff’s claims fell within the scope of a previously formed agreement, thereby rendering the plaintiff’s claims subject to the agreement’s time limitation and waiver of subrogation provisions. The District Court found that the claims fell within the scope of the agreement. The plaintiff, Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance Company (Insurer), provided property insurance to Maple Lawn Homeowners Association, Inc. (Maple Lawn) for common property located in Fulton, Maryland, including a community center (the Subject Premises). On January 18, 2018, Maple Lawn entered into an Inspection Agreement (the Agreement) with defendant, Fireline Corporation (Fireline), wherein Fireline agreed to provide:
    • annual fire alarm inspection and testing services,
    • quarterly sprinkler inspection and testing, and
    • annual portable fire extinguisher testing and inspection.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Katherine Dempsey, White and Williams LLP
    Ms. Dempsey may be contacted at dempseyk@whiteandwilliams.com

    What to Expect From the New Self-Retracting Devices Standard

    November 29, 2021 —
    One of the latest and most anticipated changes to occur this year relevant to fall protection is the publishing of the ANSI/ASSP Z359.14 2021 revision. Although the effective date isn’t until August 2022, this change is prompting the need for end user to prepare for using and understanding the new terminology performance requirements that will ultimately alter equipment selection criteria. The reason for its relevance is mostly due to its industry dependence and the increasing popularity of these types of devices. This voluntary consensus standard accounts for a vast portion of the fall protection market equipment and has been adopted as the industry standard, even though it is not the legal requirement. To assure a smooth transition, the immediate priority should be to understand the changes and what it means from a usability standpoint. A clear understanding of what changes devices need to comply will allow users to proceed with a comprehensive transition plan. What Are the Most Relevant Changes for the User? Classes The most significant changes are for Class A and B devices used to designate arrest distances and forces and the introduction of the Class 1 and 2 devices. These classes were known as designators for arresting falls at 24 inches and under with higher forces (Class A), and 54 inches and under with lower forces (Class B). Class 1 devices allow anchoring on overhead anchorages only and limitg freefall to no more than two feet. Reprinted courtesy of Andre Pelland, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Pelland may be contacted at andre.pelland@puresafetygroup.com

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    May 25, 2020 —
    As a result of the COVID-19 (commonly referred to as the Coronavirus) pandemic, remote working arrangements have become the new norm. For those working from home (WFH), the software program “Zoom Meetings,” has found a substantial increase in demand and popularity as a means to facilitate meetings online rather than meeting in person. There are also a number of other similar platforms available for online meetings such as Skype and Teams (from Microsoft), Go to Meeting (from LogMeIn) and WebEx Meetings (Cisco). Best Practices for Businesses - Privacy and Security Protocols With these platforms becoming a necessity for businesses, there are a number of best practices that should be considered to safely conduct online meetings and teleconferences as well as protect information. These include the following:
    1. Upgrade to the most recent version of the program or application;
    2. Use passwords, especially with recurring meetings;
    3. Protect all passwords as well as personal meeting identifiers used in Zoom and other platforms;
    4. Carefully moderate meetings and ask meeting attendees to identify themselves at the beginning of a meeting;
    5. Consider allowing only authenticated users to participate in meetings;
    6. Use the Waiting Rooms feature in Zoom; and
    7. Enable features available only to meeting hosts.
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion and Joshua Anderson, Newmeyer Dillion Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com Mr. Anderson may be contacted at joshua.anderson@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Brokers' MSJ on Duties Owed In Construction Defect Case

    October 19, 2017 —
    The federal district court for the District of Hawaii denied the brokers' motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal from claims that they inadequately advised the insured of the law regarding construction defects in Hawaii. Am Auto. Ins. Co. v. Haw. Nut & Bolt, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148571. Safeway sued Hawaii Nut & Bolt (HNB) and others for construction defects in a newly constructed store. The underlying complaint alleged products liability claims against HNB as the distributor of the "VersaFlex Coating System." HSB had represented that the coating system was adequate for its intended use. The underlying complaint alleged failure of the VersaFlex Coating System in waterproofing the roof deck of the store. After the store opened, water leaks from the roof deck appeared. Safeway alleged they were caused by the cracks and failures in the waterproof membrane in the roof deck. HNB notified its insurers of the claims. The insurers defended HNB during the litigation subject to reservation of rights letters. 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

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

    March 12, 2015 —
    Boxes, ladders, furniture or other objects commonly placed in aisles, walkways or paths may not be temporary obstructions and may be actionable under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) according to a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc. DBA Pier 1 Imports #1132, No. 12-16857 (filed March 5, 2015). Many property and business owners have long operated under the assumption that they are not violating ADA regulations requiring minimum clear widths for accessible routes (“[t]he minimum clear width of an accessible route shall be 36 in[ches]” (28 C.F.R. pg. 36, app. A, § 4.3.3)) when they place objects that can easily be removed in aisles or pathways such as trash cans, ladders, plants, signs and the like because temporary obstructions are not considered violations of the ADA (28 C.F.R. § 36.211(b)). Reprinted courtesy of Max W. Gavron, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Keith M. Rozanski, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Gavron may be contacted at mgavron@hbblaw.com Mr. Rozanski may be contacted at krozanski@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    March 26, 2014 —
    A $9 million construction project in Middleton, Wisconsin has been halted due to an allegation that the construction company, Newcomb, did not comply with the advertised bid requirements and they were not the lowest bidder, according to the Wisconsin State Journal. “Dane County Judge Rhonda Lanford issued a temporary restraining order at the request of Associated General Contractors of Wisconsin asking the city to stop work on the…facility,” the Wisconsin State Journal reported. “We are pleased with the court’s decision. Fairness and transparency in public contracting is critical for the industry,” Robert Barker, Associated’s executive vice president, told the Wisconsin State Journal. “The city must abide by the rules so that all bidders are given a fair shake.” However, the city stated that Newcomb was the construction company with the lowest bid in that category. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Downtown Sacramento Building Riddled with Defects

    July 23, 2014 —
    The Board of Equalization tower in Sacramento, California has gone through $60 million in repairs to deal with issues such as bats, floods, leaky windows, mold, and glass panels that would “pop off the building with no warning and shatter on the sidewalk,” according to Insurance News. However, an additional $115 million in repairs are planned to deal with “crumbling core plumbing” and “concrete-and-glass exterior,” among other problems. Now, “a Sacramento attorney filed a $50 million tort claim this month, a first step toward suing the tax-collecting department on behalf of employees who say their bosses downplayed the building's ailments and put workers' health at risk.” "Even though my lawyers told me not to say this, I don't think it's safe," board Chairman Jerome Horton told Insurance News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of