BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington stucco expert witnessSeattle Washington architect expert witnessSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington multi family design expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witness consultant
    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


    1st District Joins 2nd District Court of Appeals and Holds that One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims

    No Trial Credit in NJ Appellate Decision for Non-Settling Successive Tortfeasors – Must Demonstrate Proof of Initial Tortfeasor Negligence and Proximate Cause

    Are Untimely Repairs an “Occurrence” Triggering CGL Coverage?

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    Law Firm Fails to Survive Insurer's and Agent's Motions to Dismiss

    Automated Weather Insurance Could Offer Help in an Increasingly Hot World

    Privette: The “Affirmative Contribution” Exception, How Far Does It Go?

    Home Builders and Developers Beware: SC Supreme Court Beats Up Hybrid Arbitration Clauses Mercilessly

    Residential Building Sector: Peaking or Soaring?

    Just When You Thought General Contractors Were Necessary Parties. . .

    25 Days After Explosion, Another Utility Shuts Off Gas in Boston Area

    NY Gov. Sets Industry Advisory Council to Fix Public Contracts Process

    The 2021 Top 50 Construction Law Firms™

    Senate’s Fannie Mae Wind-Down Plan Faces High Hurdles

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2023 New York – Metro Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    An Insurance Policy Isn’t Ambiguous Just Because You Want It to Be

    When Brad Pitt Tried to Save the Lower Ninth Ward

    Car Crashes Through Restaurant Window. Result: Lesson in the History of Additional Insured Coverage

    Prior Occurrence Exclusion Bars Coverage for Construction Defects

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    Courthouse Reporter Series: The Travails of Statutory Construction...Defining “Labor” under the Miller Act

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    Tenants Underwater: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds Privity Requirement for Property Damage Claims Against Contractors

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    Dynamics of Managing Professional Liability Claims for Design Builders

    Hunton Insurance Team Wins Summary Judgment on Firm’s Own Hurricane Harvey Business Income Loss

    Fifth Circuit Rules that Settlements in Underlying Action Constitute "Other Insurance"

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    Duuers: Better Proposals with Less Work

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    Renters Trading Size for Frills Fuel U.S. Apartment Boom

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2023 “Atlanta 500” List

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Biden's Next 100 Days: Major Impacts Expected for the Construction Industry

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    How Finns Cut Construction Lead Times in Half

    Suit Limitation Provision Upheld

    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    Subcontractor Exception to Your Work Exclusion Paves the Way for Coverage

    Quick Note: COVID-19 Claim – Proving Causation

    The Need for Situational Awareness in Construction

    7 Ways Technology is Changing Construction (guest post)
    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

    Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case Triggered by Complaint's Allegations

    August 20, 2014 —
    The subcontractor's insurer could not escape contributing to defense costs of its insured when coverage was possible based upon the underlying complaint's allegations. Seneca Ins. Co. v. James River Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97156 (D. Ore. July 17, 2014). The underlying action alleged construction defects in a 60-unit complex located in Seaside, Oregon. S.D. Deacon Corp. was the general contractor and contracted with the owners association to reconstruct portions of the building, including the curtain wall. Deacon subcontracted with Superwall Design, LLP for work on the curtain wall renovation. At some point not specified in the underlying complaint, the Association notified Deacon of construction defects in the curtain wall renovation. Deacon investigated and concluded that the alleged property damage was the result of inadequate usage of materials, violations of state and local building codes, and violations of relevant industry standards relating to the work performed by Superwall. Deacon contended that the problems were caused by Superwall's faulty workmanship. 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

    The Right to Repair Act Isn’t Out for the Count, Yet. Homebuilders Fight Back

    October 02, 2015 —
    “[I]t ain’t how hard you hit; it’s about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That’s how winning is done. . . .” – Sylvester Stalone as Rocky Balboa in Rocky Balboa. Ding, ding. The Little Case That Roared Two years ago we wrote about a case that caused an uproar in the homebuilding industry – Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC, 219 Cal.App.4th 98 (2013) – in which the California Court of Appeals for the Fourth District held for the first time that the Right to Repair Act does not provide the exclusive remedy for construction defect claims involving “actual,” as opposed to “economic,” damages in new residential housing. It was a blow to the homebuilding industry who back in 2002, following a wave of construction defect lawsuits involving new residential housing, lobbied the State Legislature for the Right to Repair Act which gave homebuilders an opportunity to repair defects before being sued in court. 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

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    January 27, 2020 —
    A recent Georgia Court of Appeals case demonstrates the risk of joint ventures failing to carefully define accounting rules in their joint venture agreement. Two trade contractors teamed up to accomplish certain tasks on a job at a wastewater lift station at Fort Gordon. A joint venture agreement provided for an equal split of the profits and losses. Unfortunately, the parties did not define “profit,” and particularly did not define what cost would be deducted in calculating profit. They disputed in particular whether certain large payments to individuals and 15% overhead charges should be deducted in calculating profits. One party presented the expert testimony of an accountant while the other did not. The party presenting expert testimony asked the court to dismiss the other party’s claim because it was not supported by expert testimony of an accountant. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the claim. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com

    Finding an "Occurrence," Appellate Court Rules Insurer Must Defend

    March 11, 2024 —
    Reversing the trial court, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found the insurer must defend a cross-claim against the insured owner of a building after an explosion occurred. LBC, LLC v Spectrum Brands, Inc., 2023 Wis. App. LEXIS 1251 (Wis. Ct. App, Nov. 30, 2023). LBC leased commercial property to Spectrum. Spectrum stored lithium on the property. The lithium exploded when it came into contact with water that entered the premises during historic flooding in August 2018. Spectrum remediated the premises, vacated the premises prior to the lease's termination date, and stopped paying rent. LBC sued Spectrum, alleging that Spectrum negligently stored the lithium and that Spectrum breached the lease. Spectrum counterclaimed, alleging that LCB breached the lease in various respects, that LCB negligent allowed water to infiltrate the premises, and that Spectrum was constructively evicted. LCB tendered the counterclaim to its insurer, General Casualty. The tender was denied and LCB sued. 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

    Insurer Must Defend Construction Defect Claims

    October 07, 2016 —
    The federal district court found that under New York law, the insurer had a duty to defend construction defect claims where damage to property other than the insured's work product was possible. Am.Home Assur. Co. v. Allan Window Techs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101118 (S.D. N. Y. Aug 2, 2016). Kent Avenue Property ("Kent") sued Allan Window Technologies, Ltd. ("Allan"), alleging that Allan entered a written contract for the design, manufacture, assembly and installation of the window wall systems for a residential condominium building. Pursuant to the contract, Allan agreed to correct all work rejected as defective and to bear all costs for correcting the work. According to the complaint, the window wall systems and vent windows installed by Allan were not water-tight or air-tight, and therefore did not meet the air and water penetration requirements of the contract.The contract had an indemnification provision under which Allan agreed to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Kent from all losses, claims, lawsuits, etc. arising out of damage or injury to property at the project site. Kent sued for: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of warranty, and (3) contractual indemnity. American Home agreed to defend Allan under a full reservation of rights. American Home then sued for a declaratory judgment to establish it had no duty to defend or indemnify. 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

    Court Makes an Unsettling Inference to Find that the Statute of Limitations Bars Claims Arising from a 1997 Northridge Earthquake Settlement

    April 15, 2015 —
    In Britton v. Girardi (No. B249232 – Filed 4/1/2015), the Second Appellate District upheld the trial court’s dismissal due to the statute of limitations based on an inference it drew from a letter attached to the complaint, while reaffirming its prior application of the limitations period in Probate Code section 16460 for fraud claims in the related case of Prakashpalan v. Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack (2/27/2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1105. In Britton, just as in Prakashpalan, the plaintiffs sued the attorneys who had represented them in connection with claims against their insurer arising out of the Northridge earthquake. In 1997, the attorneys had settled that litigation for more than $100 million. The plaintiffs allege that the attorneys breached their fiduciary duty by (1) failing to provide an accounting for the settlement, (2) failing to obtain their informed consent to the settlement, and (3) concealing their misappropriation of the settlement funds. They claim that they did not discover this wrongdoing until nearly fifteen years later, in 2012, when the Prakashpalans contacted them about their settlement. Significantly, the plaintiffs attached as an exhibit to the complaint a page of the November 3, 1997 letter to the Prakashpalans (rather than the plaintiffs), which stated that a retired judge who presided over the settlement had determined the allocations and the attorneys could not distribute the proceeds until the plaintiffs signed the “Master Settlement Agreement” by which the plaintiffs agreed to its terms and to give up all claims against the insurer. Reprinted courtesy of David W. Evans, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Stephen J. Squillario, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Evans may be contacted at devans@hbblaw.com Mr. Squillario may be contacted at ssquillario@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Beverly Hills Voters Reject Plan for Enclave's Tallest Building

    November 10, 2016 —
    A costly battle over development in Beverly Hills, California, ended with voters rejecting a hotel owner’s proposal to combine two planned condominium towers into a single building that would have loomed over the wealthy Southern California enclave. With 44 percent in support and 56 percent against, Beverly Hills voters turned down plans by Beny Alagem, who owns the Beverly Hilton and is building an adjacent 170-room Waldorf Astoria, to develop a single 26-story tower next to the hotels, instead of eight- and 18-story buildings that were approved by the city council and a voter referendum in 2008. Alagem’s plan sets aside the remaining 1.7 acres (0.7 hectares) for a public park and gardens. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Nash, Bloomberg

    The COVID-19 Impact: Navigating the Legal Landscape’s New Normal

    July 27, 2020 —
    While most of the country has been at a standstill since March, you might be wondering, what about my lawsuit or my administrative charge? For the past couple of months, most litigation cases have largely been put on pause in the courts and at administrative agencies. However, as we adjust to what is clearly a new normal in both our lives and the legal landscape as we know it, cases will begin to pick up speed again, albeit with new strategies and challenges to keep in mind. As courts begin to reopen, judges are emphasizing in many jurisdictions that criminal cases will take priority in an effort to attend to constitutionally required timelines. Nevertheless, it will remain just as important as before the pause button was hit to keep cases moving forward. This ramp up period presents a unique opportunity for clients and attorneys to invest meaningful time into investigating and developing defenses to claims while the court system and related case pace remains slowed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amanda Mathieu, Lewis Brisbois
    Ms. Mathieu may be contacted at Amanda.Mathieu@lewisbrisbois.com