BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut structural steel construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominium building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessFairfield Connecticut construction expert witness public projectsFairfield Connecticut multi family design expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building consultant expertFairfield Connecticut construction project management expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut building code expert witnessFairfield Connecticut building code compliance 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


    The Johnstown Dam Failure, as Seen in the Pages of ENR in 1889

    New Jersey Legislation Would Bar Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause in Homeowners' Policies

    In Florida, Exculpatory Clauses Do Not Need Express Language Referring to the Exculpated Party's Negligence

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    Bank Window Lawsuit Settles Quietly

    Why Federal and State Agencies are Considering Converting from a “Gallons Consumed” to a “Road Usage” Tax – And What are the Risks to the Consumer?

    First-Time Buyers Home Sales Stagnates

    South Africa Wants Payment From Colluding World Cup Builders

    Zillow Seen Dominating U.S. Home Searches with Trulia

    Federal Interpleader Dealing with Competing Claims over Undisputed Payable to Subcontractor

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Apparently, It’s Not Always Who You Know”

    Connecticut Supreme Court to Review Several Issues in Asbestos Coverage Case

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

    How Machine Learning Can Help with Urban Development

    Digitalizing the Construction Site – Interview with Tenderfield’s Jason Kamha

    Vaccine Mandate Confusion Continues – CMS Vaccine Mandate Restored in Some (But Not All) US States

    Party Loses Additional Insured Argument by Improper Pleading

    Safety Guidance for the Prevention of the Coronavirus on Construction Sites

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Couple Claims Poor Installation of Home Caused Defects

    Nerves of Steel Needed as Firms Face Volatile Prices, Broken Contracts and Price-Gouging

    Recent Developments in Legislative Efforts To Combat Climate Change

    The New “White Collar” Exemption Regulations

    TOLLING AGREEMENTS: Construction Defect Lawyers use them to preserve Association Warranty Claims during Construction Defect Negotiations with Developers

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    20 Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine 2020 Top Lawyers!

    Minnesota Addresses How Its Construction Statute of Repose Applies to Condominiums

    Franchisors Should Consider Signing a Conditional Lease Assignment Rather Than a Franchisee’s Lease

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    California Federal Court Finds a Breach of Contract Exclusion in a CGL Policy Bars All Coverage for a Construction Defect Action

    Contractor Liable for Soils Settlement in Construction Defect Suit

    Take Advantage of AI and Data Intelligence in Construction

    Measure of Damages in Negligent Procurement of Surety Bonds / Insurance

    Dorian Lashes East Canada, Then Weakens Heading Out to Sea

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    AI in Construction: What Does It Mean for Our Contractors?

    Appellate Team Secures Victory in North Carolina Governmental Immunity Personal Injury Matter

    No Coverage for Roof Collapse During Hurricane

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    Attorneys' Fee Clauses are Engraved Invitations to Sue

    Condominium Association Wins $5 Million Judgment against Developer

    Homebuilder Predictions for Tallahassee

    New York's New Gateway: The Overhaul of John F. Kennedy International Airport

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    New York Court Temporarily Enjoins UCC Foreclosure Sale

    Turmoil Slows Rebuilding of Puerto Rico's Power Grid
    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

    Michigan Supreme Court Finds Faulty Subcontractor Work That Damages Insured’s Work Product May Constitute an “Occurrence” Under CGL Policy

    November 02, 2020 —
    In Skanska USA Bldg. Inc. v. M.A.P. Mech. Contractors, Inc., 2020 WL 3527909 (Mich. June 29, 2020), the Michigan Supreme Court addressed whether unintentionally faulty subcontractor work that damages an insured’s work product constitutes an “accident” under a commercial general liability insurance policy. In aligning itself with a growing number of jurisdictions, the Michigan Supreme Court answered, “yes.” In Skanska, a construction manager brought an action against a commercial general liability (CGL) insurer seeking coverage as additional insured for the cost of repairs to correct faulty work performed by its subcontractor in renovation of medical center. In 2009, the construction manager hired MAP to install a steam boiler and related piping for the medical center’s heating system. MAP’s installation included several expansion joints, which it was later discovered, were installed backward. Significant damage to concrete, steel, and the heating system occurred as a result. The construction manager performed the work of repairing and replacing the damaged property to the tune of $1.4 million, and submitted a claim to MAP’s CGL insurer, Amerisure, seeking coverage as an additional insured. Amerisure denied the claim contending that MAP’s defective construction was not a covered “occurrence” within the CGL policy. The policy defined “occurrence” as “an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions,” but did not define the term “accident.” The trial court looked to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Hawkeye-Sec. Ins. Co. v. Vector Const. Co., 185 Mich. App. 369 (1990), which defined “accident” as “…a result which is not anticipated and…takes place without the insured’s foresight or expectation and without design or intentional causation on his part.” But, again citing Hawkeye, the trial court concluded that “[d]efective workmanship, standing alone, is not an occurrence within the meaning of a[ ] general liability insurance contract[;] an occurrence exists where the insured’s faulty work product damages the property of another.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    The Importance of Preliminary Notices on Private Works Projects

    September 03, 2019 —
    Time and time again I receive calls from subcontractors and suppliers who find themselves faced with a customer who is either unwilling or unable to pay for labor or materials supplied for a private works project. As an attorney, the first question I usually ask is “did you serve a Preliminary Notice?” The second question I usually ask is “did you serve the Notice within twenty (20) days after first furnishing labor, service, equipment or materials to the job site?” The answers to these questions will often determine the ability to collect on the claim. The excuses for failing to serve the Preliminary Notice range from “for the last ten years the customer has always paid on time” to “I didn’t want to imply the contractor was not going to pay me” to “it is too much trouble to do on every job” or, simply, “I forgot”. Contractors and suppliers are well advised that any subcontractor or supplier who fails to properly and timely serve a Preliminary Notice is depriving itself of the most powerful tool available for compelling payment of construction related debt on a private works project. For all but the smallest contracts failure to serve the Preliminary Notice is also a violation of contractors’ license law and constitutes grounds for discipline by the Contractor State License Board, up to and including suspension of the contractor’s license. Most of these rules are found in California Civil Code Section 8200-8216. The requirements of these sections are far too numerous to itemize here. Suffice it to say every contractor, subcontractor and construction material supplier to private construction projects should be familiar with these sections of the California Civil Code. They set forth most of the rules which relate to Preliminary Notices on private construction projects. Some of the most important features are as follows: Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Musk Says ‘Chicago Express’ Tunnel Project Could Start Work in Months

    August 14, 2018 —
    Technology guru Elon Musk beat three other construction proposals on June 14 to win the exclusive right to negotiate a design-build-operate-maintain contract with the City of Chicago to provide a high-speed underground passenger transport system between the downtown Loop area and O’Hare Airport. He proposes a one-way trip of about 12 minutes at 150 mph compared with the current 40-minute average by rail or car. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeff Yoders, ENR
    Mr. Yoders may be contacted at yodersj@enr.com

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    June 04, 2024 —
    The court found that the insurer failed to meet its burden on summary judgment seeking a judgment that faulty workmanship precluded coverge. Auto-Owners Ins., Co. v. AAA Discount Homes, LLC, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48463 (S.D. Ga. March 19, 2024). Heather Way sued AAA Discount Homes, LLC and Delta Transport & Management, Inc. for manufacturing defects found in a manufactured home which was delivered and assembled by Delta. Way had contracted with AAA for the construction, delivery, assembly, setting, tie down with brick underpinning steps and construction of front and back porches. AAA, assisted by Delta, delivered the home and assembled it, including raising the roof, over the course of a few days. Subsequently, Way discovered extensive water damage and mold in the home. Way alleged that AAA and its subcontractors made careless, unsafe, and unsuccessful attempts at removing the old and repairing the water damage. The presence of chemicals in the home made it uninhabitable. Way alleged the home was improperly assembled by Delta and its negligence resulted in damages. 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

    What You Need to Know About CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Regulations

    May 20, 2024 —
    In November 2022, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved amendments to . . . wait for it . . . its “In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleet” regulations – that enough hyphens for you – which took effect on January 1, 2024. The purpose of the regulations is to reduce emissions from off-road equipment, many of which are used by construction contractors, such as forklifts, bulldozers, cranes and excavators. Are these new regulations? Yes and no. CARB has regulated in-use off-road diesel-fueled vehicles since 2008 and has periodically amended these regulations. The most recent amendments take effect on January 1, 2024. What vehicles do the regulations apply to? The regulations apply to two classes of vehicles (1) self-propelled off-road diesel-fueled vehicles of 25 horsepower (hp) or more; and (2) two-engine vehicles other than on-road two-engine sweepers. The regulations apply to both owned as well as rented and leased vehicles. As used in this article, the term “vehicle(s)” refers to these two classes of vehicles. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    No Entitlement to Reimbursement of Pre-Tender Fees

    April 28, 2016 —
    The Federal District Court for the District of Hawaii determined that the insured was not entitled to pre-tender defense fees. The Hanover Ins. Co. v. Anova Food, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38947 (D. Haw. March 24, 2016). Anova sold and marketed fish. It was insured under policies issued by Hanover that covered claims of "personal and advertising injury." A patent infringement and false advertising case was filed against Anova in the District Court for the District of Hawaii.The underlying complaint alleged Anova falsely, misleadingly, and deceptively advertised, promoted, and sold fish. The allegations covered a period of time between 1999 and 2012, a portion of which time Anova was covered by the Hanover policies. 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

    Proposed Florida Construction Defect Act

    January 09, 2015 —
    Michael J. Furbush and Thomas P. Wert of Roetzel & Andress discussed Florida’s House Bill 87, which proposes to “substantially overhaul Florida’s Construction Defect Act, Chapter 558, requiring property owners to provide more detailed notice of the alleged defect and imposing sanctions on property owners who make frivolous claims.” Representative Kathleen Passidomo sponsored the bill, which “requires claimants to provide additional details about the alleged defect in the notice of claim, including the specific location of each alleged defect, and the specific provisions of the building code, plans, or specifications that serve as the basis of the defect claim. The failure to include this information in the notice of claim would be considered prima facie evidence of a defective notice.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    June 04, 2024 —
    Back in the day, if someone had a problem with you the rules of school yard jungle dictated that they had better tell it to your face or you had the right to call them out on it. That, of course, was back then. These days, with social media seemingly everywhere (e.g., Yelp, Twitter, Facebook, etc.), if someone has a problem with you they tell you . . . as well as the rest of the world . . . to your digital face. Jimmy Kimmel has even made it a “thing” with his celebrity “Mean Tweets” segments. In Paglia & Associates Construction, Inc. v. Hamilton, 98 Cal.App.5th 318 (2023), homeowner Vanessa Hamilton was sued by her contractor Paglia & Associates Construction, Inc. doing business as Protech Construction after she posted critical comments to her blog and on Yelp about work performed by Paglia at her home. The Paglia Case In or about 2016, after a tree fell on her house, Hamilton’s insurer, Safeco, recommended Paglia to perform the repairs. Paglia and Hamilton entered into a repair contract in 2016 but Paglia did not finish the work until sometime in 2017 claiming that the repair was extensive because Hamilton’s circa 1923 home was in poor condition and current building codes required extensive reconstruction. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com