BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut testifying construction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction safety expertFairfield Connecticut soil failure expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building envelope expert witnessFairfield Connecticut contractor 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


    Nevada’s Changing Liability Insurance Landscape—State Insurance Regulator Issues Emergency Regulation and Guidance Addressing Controversial “Defense-Within-Limits” Legislation

    Rental Assistance Program: Good News for Tenants and Possibly Landlords

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    Recovering Unabsorbed Home Office Overhead Due to Delay

    Sierra Pacific v. Bradbury Goes Unchallenged: Colorado’s Six-Year Statute of Repose Begins When a Subcontractor’s Scope of Work Ends

    A Matter Judged: Subrogating Insurers Should Beware of Prior Suits Involving the Insured

    Subsurface Water Exclusion Found Unambiguous

    Forethought Is Key to Overcoming Construction Calamities

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Johnpaul Salem and Senior Associate Scott Hoy for Obtaining a Complete Defense Verdict!

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Los Angeles Considering Census of Seismically Unstable Buildings

    Don't Count On a Housing Slowdown to Improve Affordability

    Changes and Extra Work – Is There a Limit?

    Structural Problems May Cause Year-Long Delay Opening New Orleans School

    New York vs. Miami: The $50 Million Penthouse Battle From Zaha Hadid

    Foreign Entry into the United States Construction, Infrastructure and PPP Markets

    The Impact of the IIJA and Amended Buy American Act on the Construction Industry

    A General Contractor’s Guide to Additional Insured Coverage

    Insurer’s “Failure to Cooperate” Defense

    Everyone Wins When a Foreclosure Sale Generates Excess Proceeds

    Release Language Extended To Successor Entity But Only Covered “Known” Claims

    Landmark San Diego Hotel Settles Defects Suit for $6.4 Million

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    Supreme Court Addresses Newly Amended Statute of Repose for Construction Claims

    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Lets Broad General Release Stand in SB 800 Case

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    House Bill Clarifies Start Point for Florida’s Statute of Repose

    Insurer Liable for Bad Faith Despite Actions of Insured Contributing to Excess Judgment

    Office REITs in U.S. Plan the Most Construction in Decade

    ICYMI: Highlights From ABC Convention 2024

    A Primer on Insurance for Construction Projects

    Dispute Resolution Provision in Subcontract that Says Owner, Architect or Engineer’s Decision Is Final

    Plaintiffs’ Claims in Barry v. Weyerhaeuser Company are Likely to Proceed after Initial Hurdle

    Court Rules on a Long List of Motions in Illinois National Insurance Co v Nordic PCL

    Global Insurer Agrees to Pay COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    Significant Victory for the Building Industry: Liberty Mutual is Rejected Once Again, This Time by the Third Appellate District in Holding SB800 is the Exclusive Remedy

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    #3 CDJ Topic: Underwriters of Interest Subscribing to Policy No. A15274001 v. ProBuilders Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. D066615

    Regional US Airports Are Back After Years of Decay

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

    White and Williams Lawyers Recognized by Best Lawyers

    Is There Direct Physical Loss Under A Property Policy When COVID-19 is Present?

    First Circuit Rules Excess Insurer Must Provide Coverage for Fuel Spill

    An Expert’s Qualifications are Important

    Demand for New Homes Good News for Home Builders

    Lawsuit Decries Environmental Assessment for Buffalo, NY, Expressway Cap Project

    Just Because I May Be An “Expert” Does Not Mean I Am Giving Expert Testimony

    Contractor Entitled to Continued Defense Against Allegations of Faulty Construction

    Where Parched California Is Finding New Water Sources
    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

    “Positive Limiting Barriers” Are An Open and Obvious Condition, Relieving Owner of Duty to Warn

    June 13, 2018 —
    On June 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decided the case of Potvin v. Speedway, Inc., a personal injury case subject to the laws of Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, environmental rules require the installation of “positive limiting barriers” at gasoline service stations to contain gasoline spills of up to 5 gallons. At a self-service station now owned by Speedway, Inc., the plaintiff, a passenger in a car being serviced, exited the car but tripped on these barriers and was injured. She sued Speedway in state court, and the case was removed to federal court. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Recommendations and Drafting Considerations for Construction Contingency Clauses Part III

    December 27, 2021 —
    The best contracts provide the parties with a clear allocation of risks and responsibilities, and a process for handling inevitable project challenges. Contract negotiations can enable parties to have the difficult conversations allocating risks before the start of a project. An effective negotiation, in turn, aligns the parties’ expectations and helps avoid costly disputes born out of misunderstandings of the parties’ respective rights and responsibilities on the project. This final installment of a three-part series on contingencies in construction contracts addresses factors that should be discussed and considered when drafting a contingency clause in a construction contract with the goal of helping to set clear expectations and avoid disputes. Part I The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract explained what a construction contingency is and Part II The Best Laid Plans: Contingency in a Construction Contract discussed the two primary schools of thought on how a construction contingency fund should be used and managed. Reprinted courtesy of Samantha Schacht, Construction Executive and Josh Levy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Ms. Schacht may be contacted at samantha.schacht@huschblackwell.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    December 01, 2017 —
    A California Court of Appeal has confirmed that additional insured endorsements (“AIE”) granting coverage for liability arising out of a named insured’s “ongoing operations,” and in effect during those “ongoing operations,” do not require that the liability arise while the named insured is performing work. McMillin Mgmt. Servs., L.P. v. Financial Pacific Ins. Co., Cal. Ct. App., November 14, 2017, Case No. D069814. In McMillin, a construction defect insurance coverage action, Lexington Insurance Company argued that McMillin had no liability to homeowners until after their homes closed escrow; thus, McMillin did not face liability while the named insureds’ work was ongoing. The Court of Appeal rejected Lexington’s argument, finding that the “ongoing operations” AIEs provide only that McMillin’s liability “be ‘linked’ through a ‘minimal causal connection or incidental relationship’ with [the named insureds’] ongoing operations.” (internal citations omitted). The Court reasoned that Lexington had not established that all of the damage in the underlying action occurred after the named insureds completed their work, thus Lexington had not established as a matter of law that there was no potential for coverage for McMillin under the policies. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kevin C. Brantley, Payne & Fears
    Mr. Brantley may be contacted at kcb@paynefears.com

    Committeewoman Requests Refund on Attorney Fees after Failed Legal Efforts

    February 10, 2014 —
    West Deptford, New Jersey township redevelopment counsel Mark Cimino had spent a year arguing that the city should receive a $4 million reduction in construction costs due to “inadequate documentation provided by the bank, as well as receipts showing disbursement had ‘improperly’ been made toward uses other than construction,” according to a December 30th 2013 article in the South Jersey Times. However, a state appellate court upheld the ruling that “the township had no basis” to request the reduction. Now, Committeewoman Denice DiCarlo is “seeking a $10,000 refund on the attorney fees paid” to Cimino, the South Jersey Times reported on February 6th. “This entire matter has been a monumental waste of tax dollars, and I am angry that the entire township committee was misled by Mr. Cimino and induced to believe we had any reasonable chance of recovering loan proceeds from this lawsuit,” DiCarlo stated in a letter to Mayor Raymond Chintall. Not all committee members agree with DiCarlo. Committeeman Sam Cianfarini told South Jersey Times that “he still believed Fulton Bank owed it to West Deptford to answer for any funds put toward anything other than construction.” Cimino declared “that both the lawsuit and appeal were valid,” according to the February 6th article. He “accused DiCarlo of ‘playing politics.’” Read the full story, December 30th Article... Read the full story, February 6th Article... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    September 17, 2014 —
    Rick Caruso, a Los Angeles shopping-mall developer, plans to spend about $185 million to rebuild a Southern California seaside hotel with a troubled past into a luxury getaway. The 170-room Miramar Beach Resort and Bungalows in Montecito, near Santa Barbara, will have such amenities as a beach club, spa, restaurants and two swimming pools, said Caruso, founder of closely held developer Caruso Affiliated. The site’s former hotel, known as Miramar by the Sea, has already been razed. Caruso bought the property in 2007 from H. Ty Warner, the billionaire creator of Beanie Babies plush toys and owner of the Four Seasons Hotel New York. The California hotel, on about 15 acres (6 hectares), had been out of service for more than a decade as past revival efforts were stalled by local opposition to development and the property market’s crash. Former owners include hotelier Ian Schrager. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net

    Pandemic-Related Construction Materials Pricing Poses Challenges in Construction Lawsuits

    September 20, 2021 —
    During the global pandemic the construction industry saw unprecedented inflation in the cost of building supplies as a result of a myriad of issues. On May 7, 2021, lumber prices hit a record high at $1,670.50 per thousand board feet. This was more than six times their pandemic low in April 2020. This significant price spike was related to closure of sawmills during the height of the pandemic, low supply, soaring demand to expand existing homes or purchase new construction, the western U.S. wildfires and tariffs. More recently, lumber prices have fallen but they are still up nearly 100% from spring 2020. Some experts believe that the recent wildfires in the western United States and upcoming hurricane season will cause prices to jump back up in the upcoming months. Additionally, since March 2020, steel prices are up roughly 200%. The increase in steel prices is a result of many of the same factors causing lumber pricing spikes. Many steel mills shut down production or drastically reduced production during the early days of the pandemic expecting a deep recession and/or to comply with restrictive government mandates. Despite these industry expectations, demand for steel -elated products like grills and home appliances soared. These household demands for steel-based products impacted the price of steel for construction projects. Prior to the pandemic, hot-rolled steel traded between $500 and 800 per ton but hit an all-time high of $1,825 per ton in early July 2021. Reprinted courtesy of Nick Stewart, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Stewart may be contacted at nstewart@turnerpadget.com

    The Advantages of Virtual Reality in Construction

    August 20, 2019 —
    Virtual realty provides an unparalleled spatial sense for visualization at a lower cost than full-scale replicas. Today, VR is being used heavily in preconstruction to align owner expectations and educate design team stakeholders. For those already employing BIM solutions, coordination can be made much more effective by leveraging existing design models with very little added cost. As anyone who has tried a VR headset before can attest, the ability to accurately perceive spatial relationships in design cannot be replicated through traditional 2D media such as screens or paper. VR solutions also have the ability to iterate rapidly. These technologies are linked to BIM, providing real-time feedback as the design changes. This is in stark contrast to traditional full-scale mockups and offline renders, which are cumbersome and time-consuming to update with design changes. Substantial benefits without a hefty price tag Budget limitations and ROI are always a concern with emerging technology. Fortunately, VR comes cheaply with BIM production. These solutions are significantly less expensive than full-scale mockups and far more efficient when compared to longhand sequencing explanations and esoteric detailing of complex designs. Even the most elaborate VR setups are a fraction of overall construction cost, ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars depending on the level of adoption. Reprinted courtesy of Spivey Lipsey, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    October 30, 2023 —
    In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Guevara, 2023 IL App (1st) 221425-U, P2, the Illinois First District Court of Appeals addressed an insurance carrier’s duty to defend under a homeowners insurance policy. The underlying suit stemmed from an alleged injury suffered at a residence located in Berwyn, Illinois and owned by named insured Luz Melina Guevara, a defendant in the suit. After Guevara tendered the suit, State Farm filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Guevara because Guevara did not “reside” at the insured premises. The policy defined the "insured location" as the "residence premises," and residence premises was defined as "the one, two, three or four-family dwelling, other structures, and grounds or that part of any other building; where you reside and which is shown in the Declarations." In response to the underlying lawsuit, Guevara had filed an answer and affirmative defenses in which Guevara denied the allegation that "At all relevant times, [Guevara] resided in Berwyn, Cook County, Illinois." Guevara admitted that she owned the Berwyn property but denied that she "resided in, maintained and controlled the property". The declaratory judgment complaint alleged (among other things) that, based on admissions by Guevara in her answer, the Berwyn residence was not an "insured location" under the State Farm policy. State Farm moved for summary judgment at the trial court level on this ground and summary judgment was granted in State Farm’s favor. An appeal ensued wherein the parties disagreed as to whether there is a genuine issue of material fact that, under the language of the policy, State Farm had no duty to defend because the Berwyn property was not an "insured location" because she did not "reside" there. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com