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


    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    China Home Glut May Worsen as Developers Avoid Price Drop

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    New York Nonprofit Starts Anti-Scaffold Law Video Series

    At $350 Million, Beverly Hillbillies Mansion Is Most Expensive in U.S.

    Gilroy Homeowners Sue over Leaky Homes

    The Fair Share Act Impacts the Strategic Planning of a Jury Trial

    Hawaii Federal District Court Denies Motion for Remand

    Six Reasons to Use Regular UAV Surveys on Every Construction Project

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Need to Cover Yourself for “Crisis” Changes on a Job Site? Try These Tips (guest post)

    Pre-Covid Construction Contracts Unworkable as Costs Surge, Webuild Says

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Commercial Construction Lenders Rejoice: The Pennsylvania Legislature Provides a Statutory fix for the “Kessler” Decision

    California Expands on Scope of Coverage for Soft Cost Claims

    What Rich Millennials Want in a Luxury Home: 20,000 Square Feet

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Colorado Court Holds No Coverage for Breach of Contract Claim

    Congratulations to BWB&O Partner John Toohey and His Fellow Panel Members on Their Inclusion in West Coast Casualty’s 2022 Program!

    TARP Funds Demolish Homes in Detroit to Lift Prices: Mortgages

    Court Provides Guidance on ‘Pay-When-Paid’ Provisions in Construction Subcontracts

    Does the Recording of a Mechanic’s Lien Memorandum by Itself Constitute Process? Read to Find Out

    Washington Court of Appeals Upholds Standard of Repose in Fruit Warehouse Case

    Insured's Commercial Property Policy Deemed Excess Over Unobtained Flood Policy

    On to Year Thirteen for Blog

    It’s Time for a Net Zero Building Boom

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    Court Adopts Magistrate's Recommendation to Deny Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Superintendent’s On-Site Supervision Compensable as Labor Under Miller Act

    Don’t Miss the 2015 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    24/7 Wall Street Reported on Eight Housing Markets at All-Time Highs

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    Another Law Will Increase Construction Costs in New York

    CGL Policy Covering Attorney’s Fees in Property Damage Claims

    Surviving a Tornado – How to Navigate Insurance Claims in the Wake of the Recent Connecticut Storm

    When Customers Don’t Pay: What Can a Construction Business Do

    Federal Miller Act Payment Bond Claim: Who Gets Paid and Who Does Not? What Are the Deadlines?

    Harborside Condo Construction Defect Settlement Moves Forward

    Surfside Condo Collapse Investigators Uncover More Pool Deck Deviations

    No Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Where Underlying Claim is Strictly Breach of Contract

    Replacement of Defective Gym Construction Exceeds Original Cost

    Texas Shortens Its Statute of Repose To 6 Years, With Limitations

    Construction Insurance Rates Up in the United States

    Coverage Denied for Faulty Blasting and Improper Fill

    Architect, Engineer, and Design Professional Liens in California: A Different Animal than the Mechanics’ Lien

    Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Lease Terms Bar Landlord’s Carrier From Subrogating Against Commercial Tenant

    Legislation Update: S-865 Public-Private Partnerships in New Jersey Passed by Both Houses-Awaiting Governor’s Signature

    William Lyon to Acquire RSI Communities

    Terminator’s Trench Rehab Drives L.A. Land Prices Crazy
    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

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    January 28, 2013 —
    A lawsuit has been filed over the construction of the GrandStay Hotel & Conference Center in Apple Valley Minnesota. Apple Valley GSRS, LLC, who invested in the hotel, has sued Cole Group Architects and Cornerstone Construction, alleging that the architects design was not to industry standards and that the builder used inferior materials and techniques. The lawsuit makes claim of "significant damage." The hotel hired an engineer who subsequently recommended that all the stucco and the roof should be be replaced. The stucco has shown signs of cracking and crumbling. The hotel states that the roof has problems with leaking. Cornerstone has denied the hotel's claims. They have also counter-sued their subcontractors. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Important New Reporting Requirement for Some Construction Defect Settlements

    April 17, 2019 —
    In response to a tragic balcony collapse incident where the public later learned the contractor had paid millions to settlement defect cases in the preceding years, the California legislature passed, the state contractor’s license board is now implementing, a public disclosure requirement for certain construction defect claims. The disclosure requirement is triggered by a judgment (which is not a new requirement), an arbitration award, or a settlement of certain construction defect claims. These requirements are codified at California Business & Professions Code sections 7071.20-22. What types of Projects: This requirement applies only if all of the following apply:
    A) Residential B) Multi-Family; and C) Rental property
    Limitations on Claims – The reporting requirement only applies if all of the following are true:
    A) The claim is against a CSLB licensee (not a design professional) acting in the capacity of a contractor; B) The claim is for a structural defect; C) The total claim is valued at $1 million (not including investigation costs); D) SB800 does not apply; E) The action was filed after January 1, 2019; and F) If a lawsuit, the case was designated complex by the courts (which may not apply if only contractor is sued).
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ian Williamson, Gordon & Rees
    Mr. Williamson may be contacted at igwilliamson@grsm.com

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    October 28, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals ruled on September 28 in the case of Burch v. Premier Homes. Ms. Burch bought a home after negotiating various addendums to the contract. The contract was a standard California Association of Realtors contract to which both the buyer and seller made additions. At issue in this case was paragraph 17 of the contract which included that “Buyer and Seller agree that any dispute or claim in Law or equity arising between them out of this Agreement or resulting transaction, which is not settled through mediation, shall be decided by neutral, binding arbitration.”

    The seller/defendant’s Addendum 2 “included provisions relating to the arbitration of disputes that may arise.” Ms. Burch’s realtor, Lisa Morrin, told Burch that “she had never seen a proposed contractual provision that would require a home buyer to agree to arbitrate with a builder over construction defects.” Ms. Burch told Morrin that she did not want to buy the property if she would have to give up her rights under California law.

    As part of Addendum 2, the buyer had to buy a warranty from the Home Buyers Warranty Corporation. The sale was held up for a while, as Ms. Burch waited for a copy of the warranty. When she received it, she took further exception to Addendum 2. Scott Warren of Premier Homes said he could not sell the property without Addendum 2. Ms. Burch told her realtor that despite the claims made by Mr. Warren that this was for her benefit, she felt it was more to the benefit of Premier Homes. Don Aberbrook of HBW agreed to the clause, contained in the final sentence of Addendum 2, being struck.

    Subsequent to buying the home, Burch submitted a claim concerning construction defects. HBW denied the claim and Burch began an action against the defendants. Premier filed a motion to compel arbitration which Burch opposed.

    The trial court ruled that the striking out of the arbitration clause at the end of Addendum 2 “created a conflict with respect to the parties’ intent as to the scope of arbitration.” The trial court found that “the parties’ intention was to preserve Burch’s right to make state law claims including her right to a jury trial for any non-warranty claims against the builder.”

    The appeals court in their ruling looked at the standard of review and concluded that the purchase agreement was ambiguous and that extrinsic evidence was required to resolve that ambiguity. As the contract contained contradictory provisions as to whether or not arbitration was required, it was necessary for the trial court to examine these claims. The appeals court found that the evidence supported the conclusions of the trial court.

    Finally, the appeals court found that “there was no valid agreement to arbitrate disputes.” The court noted that arbitration can only happen by mutual consent and “it is clear that Burch did not enter into an agreement to arbitrate any construction defect disputes she might have.”

    Read the court’s decision…

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Can Your Industry Benefit From Metaverse Technology?

    November 06, 2023 —
    As the metaverse evolves, we know there are inherent risks for businesses. But what industries can we expect to be impacted and what are the potential upsides and opportunities? “We are observing how different industries are incorporating this technology to better their business strategy. For example, companies are utilizing augmented reality to assess the risk for large catastrophes, like wildfires. This technology could help prevent major disastrous events if integrated properly,” said Michael Kearney, vice president of emerging technologies and innovation at The Hartford. As virtual and augmented reality technologies become more popular, there is an uptick in demand across industries to mitigate risk, increase company efficiency and build brand awareness. There are several industries that may be significantly impacted by the evolution of the metaverse, including:
    • Technology: It is anticipated that there will be cutting edge technologies at the forefront, building the infrastructure for the metaverse.
    • Gaming: This industry has potential to be the center of the metaverse with gamers developing a deeper connection to the digital world.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    August 24, 2020 —
    In a widely anticipated ruling, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has denied two motions to centralize pretrial proceedings in hundreds of federal cases seeking coverage for business interruption losses caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the Panel has ordered expedited briefing on whether four separate consolidated proceedings should be set up for four insurers – Cincinnati, Society, Hartford, and Lloyds – who appear to be named in the largest number of claims. In seeking a single, industry-wide MDL proceeding, some plaintiffs had argued that common questions predominated across the hundreds of pending federal suits: namely, [1] the question of what constituted ‘physical loss or damage’ to property, under the allegedly standardized terms of various insurers’ policies; [2] the question whether various government closure orders should trigger coverage under those policies, and [3] the question whether any exclusions, particularly virus exclusions, applied. Reprinted courtesy of Eric B. Hermanson, White and Williams and Konrad R. Krebs, White and Williams Mr. Hermanson may be contacted at hermansone@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Krebs may be contacted at krebsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Registered Agent Advantage

    October 22, 2014 —
    In the Commonwealth of Virginia, as in most states, all corporations, LLC’s or other corporate style entities are required to have a registered agent if they are to do business in the Commonwealth. The reasons for the requirement are many, but the main ones are taxation, service of process and communication from the Virginia State Corporation Commission (the “SCC”). Without such a registered agent, many rights, for example the right to prosecute a lawsuit, are not available to the unregistered entity. As a construction company that I hope is incorporated (if you aren’t you should do take this step), your registered agent can be an officer of the company, a company that meets the requirements of the SCC that allow it to act as a registered agent, or an attorney licensed in the Commonwealth of Virginia. It is this last category that you should carefully consider. Why do I think that a Virginia construction attorney is the best candidate for use as the registered agent of either a local or out of state contractor or subcontractor? As you might imagine from the title of this post, I’ll let you know. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    An Era of Legends

    May 03, 2018 —
    In 2010, West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar added a new award: The Legend of an Era. West Coast Casualty recognizes “those in the construction defect community who inspire, contribute, advocate and influence others for the benefit and betterment of this community, making it a better place.” They define Legend as “One that inspires or achieves legendary fame based upon ones own achievement(s) which promises to be enduring” and Era, as “A fixed point of time from which a series of years is reckoned and an order of things prevail.” This annual award is presented at the West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    July 11, 2021 —
    Five years ago, residents of the Dolphin Tower in Sarasota, Florida were forced to evacuate after cracks appeared in their fourth-floor condominium units. “My assistant calls me and says, ‘[Kris] thinks the building is falling down,’” David Karins of Karins Engineering told Sarasota Magazine. “I said, ‘I doubt that.’ Then I got there and saw what was going on and I said, ‘You know, the building may be falling down.’” In July of 2010, city officials ordered all residents to evacuate. Five years and $11 million dollars in rehabilitation and residents were finally able to move back in last month. The Herald-Tribune had previously interviewed John Bonacci, an engineer at Sarasota’s Karins Engineering: “I’d say yes, there was grave danger. It was luck that it didn’t come all the way down. Getting shoring in there quickly was instrumental in preventing it from collapsing.” Read the full story, Sarasota Magazine... Read the full story, Herald-Tribune... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of