BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut engineering expert witnessFairfield Connecticut delay claim expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction defect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut reconstruction expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction claims expert witnessFairfield Connecticut expert witness concrete failureFairfield Connecticut fenestration 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


    #7 CDJ Topic: Truck Ins. Exchange v. O'Mailia

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    U.S. Supreme Court Allows Climate Change Lawsuits to Proceed in State Court

    Court Finds that Subcontractor Lacks Standing to Appeal Summary Judgment Order Simply Because Subcontractor “Might” Lose at Trial Due to Order

    Arizona Court Determines Statute of Limitations Applicable to a Claim for Reformation of a Deed of Trust (and a Related Claim for Declaratory Judgment)

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment

    Hawaii Supreme Court Finds Excess Can Sue Primary for Equitable Subrogation

    Colorado Supreme Court Weighs in on Timeliness of Claims Against Subcontractors in Construction Defect Actions

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (4/17/24) – Travel & Tourism Reach All-Time High, President Biden Emphasizes Housing in SOTU Address, and State Transportation Projects Under Scrutiny

    Mediating is Eye Opening

    Conversations with My Younger Self: 5 Things I Wish I Knew Then

    The Cheap and Easy Climate Fix That Can Cool the Planet Fast

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    The Great London Property Exodus Is in Reverse as Tenants Return

    Insured's Experts Excluded, But Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    Another Municipality Takes Action to Address the Lack of Condominiums Being Built in its Jurisdiction

    Flood Sublimit Applies, Seawater Corrosion to Amtrak's Equipment Not Ensuing Loss

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Insured's Motion for Reconsideration on Denial of Coverage Unsuccessful

    Preserving Lien Rights on Private Projects in Washington: Three Common Mistakes to Avoid

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    NLRB Broadens the Joint Employer Standard

    Absence of Property Damage During Policy Period Equates to No Coverage

    Force Majeure, Construction Delays, Labor Shortages and COVID-19

    Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Existing U.S. Home Sales Rise to Second-Highest Since 2007

    EEOC Issues Anti-Harassment Guidance To Construction-Industry Employers

    Contractor Covered for Voluntary Remediation Efforts in Completed Homes

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    PAGA Right of Action Not Applicable to Construction Workers Under Collective Bargaining Agreement

    Hurricane Handbook: A Policyholder's Guide to Handling Claims during Hurricane Season

    Metrostudy Shows New Subdivisions in Midwest

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    Recovering Time and Costs from Hurricane Helene: Force Majeure Solutions for Contractors

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    Residential Interior Decorator Was Entitled to Lien and Was Not Engaging in Unlicensed Contracting

    Art Dao, Executive Director of the Alameda County Transportation Commission, Speaks at Wendel Rosen’s Infrastructure Forum

    Don MacGregor of Bert L. Howe & Associates Awarded Silver Star Award at WCC Construction Defect Seminar

    New Zealand Using Plywood Banned Elsewhere

    More In-Depth Details on the Davis-Bacon Act Overhaul

    Economic Damages and the Right to Repair Act: You Can’t Have it Both Ways

    Mandatory Arbitration Isn’t All Bad, if. . .

    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    Using the Prevention Doctrine

    Building Safety Month Just Around the Corner

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    Preliminary Notices: Common Avoidable But Fatal Mistakes
    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. Drawing 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

    Texas Couple Claim Many Construction Defects in Home

    October 08, 2013 —
    A Galveston, Texas couple has claimed that their new home has “many” defects and are suing the seller. John Klein and Cheri Harmon-Klein state that they were told that the house was built in conformance with the International Residential Code and that the all hurricane damage had been repaired. Instead, they characterized the house as “unfit for human habitation.” The couple claims that the defects were not evident at inspection prior to their purchase. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

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

    June 06, 2018 —
    The district court accepted the magistrate's recommended ruling denying the insurer's motion for summary judgment on breach of contract and bad faith claims in a case involving collapse. Jang v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51880 (D. Conn. March 27, 2018). After purchase of their home, the insureds' inspector found large cracks in the foundation. Liberty denied coverage, contending that the basement wall was collapsing due to settling earth or movement. The insureds' expert later found the foundation had cracks from the oxidation of iron sulfide minerals in the foundation's concrete. The insureds sued for breach of contract, bad faith, and violations of the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practice Act and the Unfair Trade Practices Act. 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

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    June 07, 2021 —
    A probe continues by construction engineer Hardesty and Hanover LLC into what caused the late March collapse of a retaining wall that is part of one of New Jersey's largest roadbuilding projects—the already late-running effort called Direct Connection, which aims to untangle the convoluted interchange of north-south I-295 and east-west Route 42 in Camden County. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    December 16, 2019 —
    In Kanovsky v. At Your Door Self Storage (No. B297338; filed 11/25/19), a California appeals court held that a waiver of liability and agreement to self-insure in a storage container contract barred coverage for water damage to goods stored in the container. In Kanovsky, plaintiffs contracted for portable storage containers when moving. They loaded their washing machine into one of the containers without checking whether it was fully drained. They locked the containers and reopened them four years later to discover water damage to the contents. They sued the storage company, alleging causes of action for breach of contract; tortious breach of covenant; negligence; and violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Civil Code section 1750. The storage company’s insurer intervened and moved for summary judgment, which was granted. The appeals court affirmed. The storage company’s contract contained a release of liability stating that personal property was stored “at the customer’s sole risk” and the owners “shall not be liable for any damage or loss,” including water damage. Further, the contract stated that the containers were not waterproof, and again that the storage company was not liable for water damage. The contract attached an addendum further stating that the owner was “a landlord renting space, is not a warehouseman, and does not take custody of my property.” The addendum went on with an acknowledgement that the owner: “2. Is not responsible for loss or damage to my property; 3. Does not provide insurance on my property for me; and 4. Requires that I provide my own insurance coverage or be ‘Self-Insured’ (personally assume risk of loss or damage).” Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Says KBR Construction Costs in Iraq were Unreasonable

    August 27, 2014 —
    Mike Bosse of Bernstein Shur, analyzed a case involving Kellogg Brown and Root Services Inc. (KBR) and the U.S. Army for services that KBR provided during Operation Iraqi Freedom, according to JDSupra Business Advisor: “The court case involved KBR’s construction of dining facility services near Mosul, Iraq under a cost-plus fee arrangement. Under this contractual arrangement, all allowable costs were reimbursed by the government plus the contractor was paid an additional fee.” KBR first started on a prefabricated metal dining hall that would serve 2,500 people, but part way into building they were told to stop construction and to instead start on a new reinforced concrete building that would serve almost three times as many people. “After construction was finished, a defense contract auditing agency suspended some of the payments to KBR and instead of the $12.5 million it expected to receive, KBR was paid only $6.7 million,” reported JDSupra Business Advisor. “After trial, the court concluded KBR did not meet its burden to show the costs it incurred were reasonable under the circumstances.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    June 02, 2016 —
    The lawsuits required to perfect and foreclose upon a lien have confused lien claimants and their attorneys for years. This confusion was recently demonstrated in a recent case entitled Founders Kitchen and Bath, Inc. v. Alexander, No. A15A1262, 2015 WL 6875026 (Ga. App. 2015). In the case, the trial court granted an owner’s motion for summary judgment against a subcontractor that sought to foreclose on its materialman’s lien. In deciding to reverse the trial court’s decision, the Court held that issues of material fact still existed as to whether the owner and subcontractor were in privity of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook Jr., Autry, Hanrahan, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/27/21)

    November 19, 2021 —
    Commercial real-estate sales surge in the third quarter, blockchain-integrated real estate is poised to span into new sectors, a major home builder is teaming with a Texas startup to create a community of 100 3-D printed homes, and more.
    • In the not-too-distant future, it is predicted blockchain-integrated real estate will be implemented in sectors beyond payments via digital currency, spanning to automated transactions, smart contracts, and more. (Adam Redolfi, Forbes)
    • Despite warnings that the COVID-19 pandemic would erode property values, purchases of apartment buildings, life-science labs and industrial properties resulted in commercial sales of more than $193 billion in the quarter, up 19% compared with the same three months in 2019. (Peter Grant, The Wall Street Journal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Properly Trigger the Performance Bond

    January 04, 2018 —
    Originally Published by CDJ on January 5, 2017 A performance bond is a valuable tool designed to guarantee the performance of the principal of the contract made part of the bond. But, it is only a valuable tool if the obligee (entity the bond is designed to benefit) understands that it needs to properly trigger the performance bond if it is looking to the bond (surety) to remedy and pay for a contractual default. If the performance bond is not properly triggered and a suit is brought upon the bond then the obligee could be the one materially breaching the terms of the bond. This means the obligee has no recourse under the performance bond. This is a huge downside when the obligee wanted the security of the performance bond, and reimbursed the bond principal for the premium of the bond, in order to address and remediate a default under the underlying contract. A recent example of this downside can be found in the Southern District of Florida’s decision in Arch Ins. Co. v. John Moriarty & Associates of Florida, Inc., 2016 WL 7324144 (S.D.Fla. 2016). Here, a general contractor sued a subcontractor’s performance bond surety for an approximate $1M cost overrun associated with the performance of the subcontractor’s subcontract (the contract made part of the subcontractor’s performance bond). The surety moved for summary judgment arguing that the general contractor failed to property trigger the performance bond and, therefore, materially breached the bond. The trial court granted the summary judgment in favor of the performance bond surety. Why? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dadelstein@gmail.com