BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut casino resort building expert Fairfield Connecticut office building building expert Fairfield Connecticut Medical building building expert Fairfield Connecticut multi family housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut institutional building building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom home building expert Fairfield Connecticut retail construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut custom homes building expert Fairfield Connecticut parking structure building expert Fairfield Connecticut condominiums building expert Fairfield Connecticut mid-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut tract home building expert Fairfield Connecticut townhome construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut concrete tilt-up building expert Fairfield Connecticut production housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut landscaping construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut high-rise construction building expert Fairfield Connecticut Subterranean parking building expert Fairfield Connecticut industrial building building expert Fairfield Connecticut low-income housing building expert Fairfield Connecticut
    Fairfield Connecticut consulting architect expert witnessFairfield Connecticut structural engineering expert witnessesFairfield Connecticut roofing construction expertFairfield Connecticut construction cost estimating expert witnessFairfield Connecticut consulting general contractorFairfield Connecticut construction scheduling 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


    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    Haight Brown & Bonesteel Ranked on the 2017 "Best Law Firms" List by U.S. News - Best Lawyers

    The Louvre Abu Dhabi’s Mega-Structure Domed Roof Completed

    Minimum Wage on Federal Construction Projects is $10.10

    Beware of Personal-Liability Clauses – Even When Signing in Your Representative Capacity

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

    Update: Where Did That Punch List Term Come From Anyway?

    Blackstone Suffers Court Setback in Irish Real Estate Drama

    LA Metro To Pay Kiewit $297.8M Settlement on Freeway Job

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    Mediation Scheduled for Singer's Construction Defect Claims

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Denial of Coverage for Bulge in Wall Upheld

    Do You Really Want Mandatory Arbitration in Your Construction Contract?

    New Orleans Reviews System After Storm Swamps Pumps

    Construction Defects Checklist

    Testimony from Insureds' Expert Limited By Motion In Limine

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    Supreme Court of Idaho Rules That Substantial Compliance With the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act Suffices to Bring Suit

    Legal Implications of 3D Printing in Construction Loom

    DIR Reminds Public Works Contractors to Renew Registrations Before January 1, 2016 to Avoid Hefty Penalty

    Building with Recycled Plastics – Interview with Jeff Mintz of Envirolastech

    California Supreme Court Raises the Bar on Dangerous Conditions on Public Property Claims

    Interior Designer Licensure

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

    Speeding up Infrastructure Projects with the Cloud

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    NAHB Reports on U.S. Jobs Created from Home Building

    Court of Appeals Rules that HOA Lien is not Spurious, Despite Claim that Annexation was Invalid

    Preparing the Next Generation of Skilled Construction Workers: AGC Workforce Development Plan

    Maintenance Issues Ignite Arguments at Indiana School

    Montana Theater Threatened by Closure due to Building Safety

    Digital Twins – Interview with Cristina Savian

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    New York State Trial Court Addresses “Trigger of Coverage” for Asbestos Claims and Other Coverage Issues

    Newmeyer Dillion Secures Victory For Crown Castle In Years-Long Litigation With City Council Of Piedmont Over Small Cell Wireless Telecommunications Sites

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Construction Defect Bill Introduced in California

    Record Home Sales in Sydney Add to Bubble Fear

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    U.S. Housing Starts Exceed Estimates After a Stronger December

    Texas Legislative Update

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose
    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 this considerable body of 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

    Concerns Over Unstable Tappan Zee Bridge Push Back Opening of New NY Bridge's Second Span

    October 02, 2018 —
    Sept. 08 --Big bridge, big scissors, big problems. A day after an elaborate ribbon-cutting ceremony, the grand opening of the second span of the new Gov. Mario M. Cuomo bridge was postponed over concerns that the remains of the "destabilized" and "dangerous" Tappan Zee Bridge could collapse. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Engineering News-Record
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    December 20, 2017 —
    The Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's determination that the seller's alleged negligent misrepresentation regarding the propensity of the property to flood was covered. Erie Ins. Exh. v. Maxwell, 2017 Tenn. App. LEXIS 746 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2017). The Chapmans purchased a residence from the Maxwells on March 7, 2014. Prior to the sale, the Maxwells completed a residential property disclosure in which they allegedly misrepresented the propensity of the property to flood. Five months after the purchase, the residence sustained damage as a result of two floods within three days. The Chapmans sued, alleging they relied on the Maxwells' representations regarding the propensity of the property to flood. The Chapmans further alleged that they sustained property damage as a result of the Maxwells' negligence and negligent misrepresentations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Packard Condominiums Settled with Kosene & Kosene Residential

    August 27, 2014 —
    Residents of the Packard Condominiums in Indianapolis, Indiana “have settled a two-year-old lawsuit with developer Kosene & Kosene Residential,” according to the Indianapolis Business Journal. The Homeowners association stated that “the agreement would lead to repayment of a construction loan and avoidance of a special assessment on residents.” The association claimed to have spent “$3 million on ‘renovation and remediation’ of subpar construction of the condo building,” reported the Indianapolis Business Journal. The article also declared that at least 25 subcontractors participated in the mediation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    With VA Mechanic’s Liens Sometimes “Substantial Compliance” is Enough (but don’t count on it) [UPDATE]

    October 14, 2019 —
    Virginia mechanic’s liens are a powerful and tricky beast that in most cases require absolute precision in their preparation. However, an interesting opinion recently came out of the Virginia Supreme Court that may provide a bit of a “safe harbor” from the total form over function nature of a mechanic’s lien. In Desai, Executrix v. A.R. Design Group Inc., the Court considered a lien memorandum that had what could be described as technical flaws in the preparation of the mechanic’s lien by A. R. Design Group. The basic facts are that A. R. Design Group used the form of lien found in Va. Code Sec. 43-5 (also found as Form CC-1512 at the Virginia Judiciary website) when it recorded two lien memoranda for two pieces of property owned by a trust. Relating to one of the two properties, the memorandum failed to identify the “Owner” as the trustee of the trust. On the memoranda relating to both properties the affidavit verifying the amounts claimed did not identify the signatory as agent for A. R. Design Group, instead listing the agent as the claimant and further failed to state a date from which interest is claimed or a date on which the debt was due. Needless to say, the owner argued that each of these technical defects invalidated the memoranda and therefore they should have been released. Somewhat surprisingly the Fairfax, Virginia Circuit Court disagreed and held the liens to be valid. On appeal, the Virginia Supreme Court affirmed the lower court. The held that the failure to add the word “Trustee” after Ulka Desai’s name did not invalidate the lien because the trustee had all of the rights of ownership and furthermore that naming Desai in the memorandum served the purpose of putting third parties on notice of the lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Construction Defect Claim Did Not Harm Homeowner, Court Rules

    September 30, 2011 —

    The Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled in Creswell v. Estate of Howe, a case in which a woman bought a home and then sued the seller’s estate, both sets of real estate agents, and the homeowner’s association over construction defects. A district court ruled against her, granting summary judgment to the other parties.

    After buying a townhome “as is,” Catherine Creswell claims to have shared a thought with her agent that the homeowners association was, in the words of her agent, “trying to hide something.” Later, Creswell found that a few days before her closing, the board had discussed problems with “roofs, siding and soundproofing of the townhomes.” The court noted that “it was clear from the documents that appellant [Creswell] received that the association had known about various construction defects for many years, some of which affected [her] unit.”

    Creswell initially sued the estate, the man who negotiated the sale for his mother’s estate, the real estate companies and the agents involved, the homeowners association, and four board members. Later she sued for punitive damages, dropped a claim for interference with contractual relations, and dismissed her claims against the individual board members. The court dismissed all of Creswell’s claims awarding costs to those she sued.

    The appeals court has affirmed the decision of lower court, noting that Creswell “did not provide us with any argument why the district court erred in dismissing her unjust-enrichment, breach of contract, or rescission claims against the various respondents.” Nor did she provide evidence to support her claims of “breach of duty, fraud, and violation of consumer protection statutes.”

    The court noted that Creswell could not sue the homeowners association over the construction defects because she “failed to prove that she was damaged by the association’s nondisclosure.” The court noted that “there are no damages in this case,” as Creswell “was never assessed for any repairs, she had not paid anything out-of-pocket for repairs, and she has presented no evidence that the value of her individual unit has declined because of the alleged undisclosed construction defects.”

    The court granted the other parties motion to dismiss and denied Creswell’s motion to supplement the record. Costs were awarded to the respondents.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Federal Public Works Construction Collection Remedies: The Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    July 30, 2015 —
    Federal public work construction projects are unique in that there are no Stop Payment Notice or Mechanics Lien remedies available. Furthermore, although a remedy is available by proceeding against the original contractor’s payment bond under a federal law known as the “Miller Act” and its corresponding Federal Regulations (40 USCS 3131 et seq. and 48 CFR 28.101-1 et seq.), this remedy is not available to all subcontractors or suppliers. In addition, there are circumstances where a different form of security can be substituted for the payment bond (40 USCS 3131(b)(2)). Among those who generally cannot sue on the Miller Act Payment Bond are third-tier subcontractors and suppliers to suppliers. (See J.W. Bateson Company v. Board of Trustees, 434 U.S. 586 (1978)). As a general rule, every subcontractor, laborer, or material supplier who deals directly with the prime contractor may bring a lawsuit against the bond company providing the Miller Act Payment Bond. Further, every subcontractor, laborer, or material supplier who has a direct contractual relationship with a first tier subcontractor may bring such an action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, The Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Protect Against Design Errors With Owners Protective Professional Indemnity Coverage

    March 14, 2018 —
    Prior to the devastation caused by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, the AIA Consensus Construction Forecast had predicted “slower growth for the construction industry for the remainder of 2017 and through 2018.” But, given the hundreds of billions of dollars in damages caused by these horrific events, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, estimates a lift to the economy through the rebuilding of these areas. This, of course, is dependent on insurer funds and the amount of aid offered through government sources. Nonetheless, the process will be costly, timely and exhaustive. Under such circumstances, speed is a necessity. In addition to being drawn into the earliest stages of the project development cycle, the services of construction professionals have merged so intensely that even their “consultative advice” have produced exposures in “collaborative” environments rife with liability. A challenge for contractors in today’s design/build marketplace is securing professional liability insurance policies that will not only manage the risks associated with their own errors and omissions, but also the problems caused by designers and others contracted to work on the project. However, this too is not very easy. Such policies when purchased by contractors can be exceedingly cost prohibitive. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph Nawa, Construction Executive, a Publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All Rights Reserved
    Mr. Nawa may be contacted at joseph.nawa@newdayunderwriting.com

    Are You Ready For 2015?

    January 07, 2015 —
    Last month’s Engineering News Record Magazine contained an editorial noting the worst projects of the year. Are you prepared if you have a bad project? As the editors aptly pointed out: "By their nature, bad projects disappoint owners, incite hostility among team members, slip months and years past scheduled completions and drain finances." ENR pointed noted a few projects from 2014 that did not go well. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com