BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington consulting engineersSeattle Washington consulting general contractorSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness structural engineerSeattle Washington construction expert witness consultantSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Seattle, Washington

    Washington Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: (SB 5536) The legislature passed a contractor protection bill that reduces contractors' exposure to lawsuits to six years from 12, and gives builders seven "affirmative defenses" to counter defect complaints from homeowners. Claimant must provide notice no later than 45 days before filing action; within 21 days of notice of claim, "construction professional" must serve response; claimant must accept or reject inspection proposal or settlement offer within 30 days; within 14 days following inspection, construction pro must serve written offer to remedy/compromise/settle; claimant can reject all offers; statutes of limitations are tolled until 60 days after period of time during which filing of action is barred under section 3 of the act. This law applies to single-family dwellings and condos.


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Seattle Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    MBuilders Association of King & Snohomish Counties
    Local # 4955
    335 116th Ave SE
    Bellevue, WA 98004

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kitsap County
    Local # 4944
    5251 Auto Ctr Way
    Bremerton, WA 98312

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Spokane
    Local # 4966
    5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201
    Spokane, WA 99212

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of North Central
    Local # 4957
    PO Box 2065
    Wenatchee, WA 98801

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    MBuilders Association of Pierce County
    Local # 4977
    PO Box 1913 Suite 301
    Tacoma, WA 98401

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362
    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10

    Jefferson County Home Builders Association
    Local # 4947
    PO Box 1399
    Port Hadlock, WA 98339

    Seattle Washington Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Seattle Washington


    COVID-19 Vaccine Considerations for Employers in the Construction Industry

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Sustainability Puts Down Roots in Real Estate

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    Tallest U.S. Skyscraper Dream Kept Alive by Irish Builder

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

    California Contractors: Amended Section 7141.5 Provides Important License Renewal Safety Net

    SIGAR Report Finds +$15 Billion in “Waste, Fraud and Abuse” in Afghanistan

    Meet BWB&O’s 2025 Best Lawyers in America!

    One to Watch: Case Takes on Economic Loss Rule and Professional Duties

    Nader Eghtesad v. State Farm General Insurance Company

    Lessons Learned from Implementing Infrastructure BIM in Helsinki

    Hawaii Court Looks at Changes to Construction Defect Coverage after Changes in Law

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    Texas and Georgia Are Paying the Price for Sprawl

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Century Communities Acquires Dunhill Homes Las Vegas Operations

    New World to Demolish Luxury Hong Kong Towers in Major Setback

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

    House Approves $715B Transportation and Water Infrastructure Bill

    Guardrail Maker Defrauded U.S. of $175 Million and Created Hazard, Jury Says

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Building Permits Up in USA Is a Good Sign

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Agent May Be Liable for Failing to Submit Claim

    Louisiana Court Applies Manifestation Trigger to Affirm Denial of Coverage

    Seattle Crane Strike Heads Into Labor Day Weekend After Some Contractors Sign Agreements

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

    Boston Building Boom Seems Sustainable

    Run Spot...Run!

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    Beyond the Statute: How the Colorado Court Upheld Modified Accrual in Construction Contracts

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    New Braves Stadium Is Three Months Ahead of Schedule, Team Says

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

    Quick Note: Unenforceable Language in Arbitration Provision

    A Teaming Agreement is Still a Contract (or, Be Careful with Agreements to Agree)

    Restrictions On Out-Of-State Real Estate Brokers Being Challenged In Nevada

    Policing Those Subcontractors: It Might Take Extra Effort To Be An Additional Insured

    The Ghosts of Projects Past

    NIST Florida Condo Collapse Probe Develops Dozens of Hypotheses

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (10/11/23) – Millennials Struggle Finding Homes, Additional CHIPS Act Funding Available, and the Supreme Court Takes up Hotel Lawsuit Case

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyers Rising Stars!

    Maryland Court Affirms Condo Association’s Right to Sue for Construction Defects

    Consequential Damages From Subcontractor's Faulty Work Constitutes "Property Damage" and An "Occurrence"

    Demanding a Reduction in Retainage

    Construction Termination Part 3: When the Contractor Is Firing the Owner

    U.S. District Court for Hawaii Again Determines Construction Defect Claims Do Not Arise From An Occurrence
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington 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
    Seattle, Washington

    CDJ’s #8 Topic of the Year: California’s Board of Equalization Tower

    December 31, 2014 —
    Imagine a workplace where bats fly, floors flood, and glass panels randomly pop out of the building to shatter on the sidewalk. Add to that repairs that could total more than twice the purchase price, and you have a story. Especially when it involves a California government facility. Jon Ortiz of the Sacramento Bee shared the story on Insurance News. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    October 02, 2013 —
    Crain’s Cleveland Business reports that both commercial and residential construction have seen spending increases in the last twelve months. The gain was only 5.4%, but it’s still welcome in the area. “It’s been quiet so long, it wouldn’t take much to generate an upturn,” according to Tom Laird, of Gilbane Building Co. Some of the upturn comes from new building at universities and hospitals, but the corporate sector is also starting new project. Finally, the city of Cleveland is looking for proposals to develop parcels on their waterfront. Still, some are wary. “It might just be a bubble,” said Jason Jones, the general manager of Turner Construction’s Cleveland office. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ignoring Employee ADA Accommodation Requests Can Be Costly – A Cautionary Tale

    March 29, 2021 —
    As all employers should well know by now, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and many state and local counterparts may require employers to engage in an interactive process in response to a disabled employee’s request for a workplace accommodation. A recent ruling by the First Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates why employers have a very strong financial incentive to be proactive in adopting and rigorously enforcing their disability accommodation policies. In Burnett v. Ocean Properties, decided on February 2, 2021, a wheelchair user employed by a hotel chain call center complained internally that the office’s entrance was not accessible to him. It had heavy doors beyond which was a downward slope that caused the plaintiff’s wheelchair to roll backwards as the door closed on him, requiring him to exert greater force as he struggled to enter. He asked that push-button automatic doors be installed. The employer did not take any meaningful steps to address the complaint with the plaintiff. Eventually he was injured as he tried to open the door. Still, the employer did not follow up on his accommodation request. The plaintiff eventually filed an administrative charge with the Maine Human Rights Commission. The employer met with the plaintiff at that time, but claimed lack of familiarity with ADA compliance requirements and took no action to address the complaint. The plaintiff eventually resigned and filed suit in federal court when the administrative process was completed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Peter Shapiro, Lewis Brisbois
    Mr. Shapiro may be contacted at Peter.Shapiro@lewisbrisbois.com

    Biden’s Buy American Policy & What it Means for Contractors

    February 22, 2021 —
    January 25, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order (EO) “Ensuring the Future is Made in All America by All of America’s Workers”, which seeks to bolster U.S. manufacturing through the federal procurement process. Note that, just six day earlier, on January 18, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Counsel issued a final rule implementing former President Trump’s July 2019 EO, titled “Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials” (EO No. 13881) on the then-current Buy American standards. For context, Trump’s proposed revisions – adopted and implemented by the FAR Council earlier this year – imposed three (3) significant changes worth noting: (1) increasing the percentage of domestic content (other than iron or steel) from 50% to 55% that an end product must contain in order to qualify as a “domestic end product”; (2) implementing an even higher increase in the domestic content requirement for iron and steel products to at least 95% U.S. “predominately” iron or steel product; and (3) increasing the price evaluation preference for domestic offerors from 6% to 20% (for other than small business) and 30% (for small businesses). The FAR’s rule became effective January 21, 2021, and applies to solicitations issued on or after February 22, 2021, and resulting contracts let. Biden’s EO rescinds Trump’s EO No. 13881 “to the extent inconsistent with [Biden’s] EO.” However, when dissected, it is clear Biden’s Buy American plan does little to modify thresholds inconsistent with the Trump Administration; rather, the White House’s latest EO implements changes in the form of BA administration. Nonetheless, Biden’s EO does expressly note that it supersedes and replaces Trump’s EO on the same issues. Reprinted courtesy of Meredith Thielbahr, Gordon & Rees and Nicole Lentini, Gordon & Rees Ms. Thielbahr may be contacted at mthielbahr@grsm.com Ms. Lentini may be contacted at nlentini@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Governor Brown Signs Legislation Aimed at Curbing ADA Accessibility Abuses in California

    June 02, 2016 —
    This past week Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 269. The new law is the latest attempt to curb lawsuits brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) and related states laws which many businesses and governmental entities have called unfair and predatory. Others, have used more colorful descriptions. The ADA Debate At the heart of the debate is a small but growing number of ADA plaintiffs who regularly sue businesses and governmental entities alleging that their properties do not provide equal access to disabled individuals. These ADA plaintiffs and their attorneys, including other members of the disabled community, argue that these lawsuits improve access to places of public accommodation by disabled individuals, are permitted under the law, and that the businesses and government agencies they sue can’t be heard to complain since the ADA has been on the books for over twenty-five years. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Accessibility Considerations – What Your Company Should Be Aware of in 2021

    May 03, 2021 —
    Accessibility claims increased significantly in 2020, with this specific type of ADA-related case increasing by 23% from 2019 to 2020.1 This includes cases filed in federal court and those filed in California state court under the Unruh Act - with a direct reference to violation of the ADA.2 In California alone, a total of 989 cases were filed in 2020, representing almost 30% of all accessibility cases filed in the United States.3 These claims go beyond the traditional complaints related to a website maintained by an organization. While desktop websites dominate the overall number of lawsuit claims nationally, mobile apps continue to get significant attention along with a new trend in video content related claims. These video claims demand that all video have closed captions and audio descriptions.4 The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has created a surge in the reliance on websites and other platforms to accommodate working from home, online learning, as well as ordering groceries, food or other items online in an effort to stay home and safe. However, along with this substantial increase in demand, many users who rely on accessibility features have found many websites and related mobile applications to be inaccessible for their needs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Heather H. Whitehead, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Whitehead may be contacted at heather.whitehead@ndlf.com

    Federal Court Dismisses Coverage Action in Favor of Pending State Proceeding

    October 12, 2020 —
    The federal district court declined to exercise jurisdiction over the coverage action that was parallel to a case pending in state court involving the same parties and same issues pending. Navigators Ins, Co. v. Chriso's Tree Trimming, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129711 (E.D. Calif. July 22, 2020). Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) entered into a tree, brush and wood removal contract with Mount F Enterprises, Inc. Mountain F subsequently entered into a subcontractor agreement with Chriso Tree Trimming, Inc. for work to be performed for PG&E. In August 2017, Chriso attempted to remove a tree, but the tree accidentally fell in the wrong direction and knocked down nearby powerlines. The powerlines came into contact with surrounding brush and started the "Railroad Fire." The fire was eventually contained on September 15, 2017, after 12, 407 acres were burned and 7 structures and 7 homes were destroyed. Five subrogation lawsuits were filed in state court against Chriso and Mountain F by various insurance companies that paid for the damage caused by the Railroad Fire. A policy limits demand to settle all claims against Chriso and Mountain F was made. Navigators insured Chriso for $9 million through a Commercial Excess Liability Policy, payable once all other insurance was exhausted. The policy included a "Professional Services Endorsement" (PSE Exclusion) that excluded coverage of "professional services." "Professional services" was defined through a list of 12 non-exclusive professions and services that generally referred to activities involving specialized knowledge or skill that was predominantly mental or intellectual in nature rather than physical or manual. 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

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    April 12, 2021 —
    White and Williams is proud to be included in BTI Consulting Group’s report of “The 70 Law Firms Improving Client Service Performance More Than All Others." The pandemic forced law firms to navigate and respond instinctively as new client situations popped up daily and weekly. White and Williams was quick to establish a Covid-19 team and resource center to help clients navigate the rapidly developing business and legal issues brought on by the pandemic and provide timely and practical advice. This recognition is a testament to the firm’s commitment to provide clients with best-in-class service and the trust that clients have instilled in the firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP