BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness structural engineerSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failureSeattle Washington architectural engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington construction expert witnesses
    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


    Failure to Comply with Contract Leaves No Additional Insured Coverage

    Three Kahana Feld Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2025

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    $17B Agreement Streamlines Disney World Development Plans

    10 Year Anniversary – Congratulations Greg Podolak

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    Negligence Per Se Claim Based Upon Failure to Pay Benefits Fails

    Bankruptcy on a Construction Project: Coronavirus Edition

    Maui Wildfire Cleanup Could Cost $1B and Take One Year

    Creating a Custom Home Feature in the Great Outdoors

    Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

    Newmeyer & Dillion Welcomes Three Associates to Newport Beach Office

    Preventing Common Electrical Injuries on the Jobsite

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    Las Vegas HOA Conspiracy & Fraud Case Delayed Again

    Predicting the Future of Texas’s Grid Is a Texas-Sized Challenge

    Homeowner Alleges Pool Construction Is Defective

    Three Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Contractors Should Be Optimistic that the Best Value Tradeoff Process Will Be Employed by Civilian Agencies

    Fifth Circuit Decision on Number of Occurrences Underscores Need to Carefully Tailor Your Insurance Program

    General Contractor Gets Fired [Upon] for Subcontractor’s Failure to Hire Apprentices

    Comparing Contracts: A Review of the AIA 201 and ConsensusDocs - Part I

    Mutual Or Concurrent Delay Caused By Subcontractors

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    California Assembly Passes Expedited Dam Safety for Silicon Valley Act

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    Do Construction Contracts and Fraud Mix After All?

    New Becker & Poliakoff Attorney to Expand Morristown Construction Litigation Practice

    Is an Initial Decision Maker, Project Neutral, or Dispute Resolution Board Right for You?

    Do We Really Want Courts Deciding if Our Construction Contracts are Fair?

    Are Housing Prices Poised to Fall in Denver?

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Client Alert: Stipulated Judgment For Full Amount Of Underlying Claim As Security For Compromise Settlement Void As Unenforceable Penalty

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    Top 10 Take-Aways from the 2024 Annual Forum Meeting in New Orleans

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2021 “Atlanta 500” List

    Contractor’s Coverage For Additional Insured Established by Unilateral Contract

    BOOK CLUB SERIES: Everything You Want to Know About Construction Arbitration But Were Afraid to Ask

    California Court of Appeal Provides Clarity On What Triggers Supplemental Analysis Under California Environmental Quality Act

    Important Information Regarding Colorado Mechanic’s Lien Rights.

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

    A New Lawsuit Might Change the Real Estate Industry Forever

    Pa. Contractor Pleads No Contest to Prevailing-Wage Charges, Pays Workers $20.7M

    GAO Sustains Unsupported Past Performance Evaluation and Unequal Discussion Bid Protest

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington 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 Seattle'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
    Seattle, Washington

    Reduce Suicide Risk Among Employees in Remote Work Areas

    November 24, 2019 —
    In the construction industry, a disturbing and unnerving trend has been developing over the past few decades. Construction and resource extraction have the highest rate of deaths by suicide compared to any other industry. This phenomenon is not limited to a single country. The statistics from three developed countries with strong construction and resource extraction industries (United States, United Kingdom and Australia), reflect the same pattern. A major risk factor that has not been given much attention and scrutiny is the requirement for many workers to be away from their homes for long periods of time, based in remote locations and basecamps. This isolation contributes to loneliness and disconnectedness that increases the vulnerability to employees at risk due to underlying mental health disorders, such as depression and anxiety, or those with suicidal ideations or prior attempts. Basecamps or remote work locations remove workers from the support networks of family, friends, and even medical and psychological caregivers. Employers placing employees in remote work locations should be mindful that simply wanting to work in a remote location does not necessarily equate to being able to cope well in such an environment—unless appropriate supports are provided. Companies need to become proactive to lead employees to become true teams to help reduce the risk of suicide among their workers. Reprinted courtesy of Sandra Moran, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ninth Circuit: Speculative Injuries Do Not Confer Article III Standing

    February 28, 2018 —
    As Dwight Schrute of hit NBC show “The Office” said, “identity theft is not a joke, Jim! Millions of families suffer every year!” In response, Congress has passed a variety of legislation over the years aimed at curbing identity theft. One such piece of legislation, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), as amended by corollary acts, prohibits the printing of more than the last 5 digits of the credit card number or the credit card number’s expiration date on any sales receipt. Anyone who “willfully fails to comply with [the requirements] is liable to that consumer” for statutory or actual damages, attorney’s fees and costs, and potential punitive damages. But is a statutory violation of the FCRA alone a sufficient injury to confer Article III standing? No, says the Ninth Circuit. Reprinted courtesy of Omar Parra, Haight, Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Lawrence S. Zucker II , Haight, Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Parra may be contacted at oparra@hbblaw.com Mr. Zucker may be contacted at lzucker@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    April 03, 2013 —
    Methodically analyzing the damage claims, the federal district court largely denied the insurers' motions for summary judgment for coverage of construction defect claims. Big-D Constr. Corp. v. Take It for Granite Too, 2013 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 8377 (D. Nev. Jan. 22, 2013). Big-D was the general contractor for a remodeling project of International Gaming Technologies' (IGT) building. Big-D subcontracted with Take it for Granite Too (TIFGT) to install various tiling and stonework on the interior and exterior of the building. After TIFGT began its stonework, a stone tile fill from an exterior wall. Over the next several months and after completion of TIFGT's work, two additional stones fell from exterior walls. IGT directed Big-D to replace TIFGT's stonework on the walls. Big-D notified TIFGT and requested that it make immediate repairs. TIFGT did not respond and eventually went out of business. Experts opined that the cause of the stones falling was efflorescence between the tile and the wall. Efflorescence occurred when the stone started to deteriorate, spall, and become soft. It was caused by water entering through an open joint and getting behind the stone tile. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Former Trump Atlantic City Casino Set for February Implosion

    December 29, 2020 —
    The 39-story main tower of the former Trump Plaza hotel-casino on the Atlantic City, N.J., boardwalk, sold to investor Carl Icahn in 2016, will be imploded in February by a Philadelphia general contractor already in the process of dismantling the former showplace of President Donald Trump's real estate holdings. 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

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act May be Extended to 2016

    April 07, 2011 —

    The Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011 (H. R. 1309) has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services—the first step in the legislative process. The bill, if passed, would extend the program to September 30, 2016. It is currently slated to be terminated September 30 of this year. The bill also contains changes to premium rates, mapping protocols, and privatization initiatives.

    H. R. 1309 has garnered the support of several Insurance organizations. Leigh Ann Pusey, president and CEO of the American Insurance Association (AIA), sent a letter of support to the Chair and Ranking member of the House Financial Services Subcommittee. “AIA has advocated for a long term reauthorization of the NFIP to protect consumers and help increase stability for real estate transactions and policyholders,” Pusey said. “AIA believes the five-year extension contained in HR 1309, will provide certainty in the flood program thereby increasing consumer and business confidence in the NFIP.”

    Jimi Grande, senior vice president of federal and political affairs for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) spoke out in support of the bill. “For the NFIP to survive, the prices for flood insurance must reflect the actual costs of flood risk for a property,” Grande said. “HR 1309 will provide that transparency. In addition, the Technical Mapping Advisory Council will give communities a voice in the flood mapping process, fostering a better understanding of what flood maps represent and how they are made.”

    Read H. R. 1309...
    Read the American Insurance Association statement...
    Read the NAMIC Press Release...

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

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    September 03, 2015 —
    August 26, 2015 - The Fifth Appellate District ruled SB800 (California's "Right to Repair Act" [the "Act"]) provides the sole remedy for homeowners in construction defect actions. The court found "no other cause of action is allowed to recover for repair of the defect itself or for repair of any damage caused by the defect." (McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court of California (Aug. 26, 2015, No. F069370) __ Cal.App.4th __ [2015 WL 5029324].) The court issued a blistering criticism of the Fourth Appellate District's prior opinion in Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which severely limited the reach of the Act to actions not involving property damage and allowing property damage claims to proceed freely under common law without any constraints posed by the Act. In McMillin, the court reviewed whether a homeowner was required to follow the Act's prelitigation procedures even after dismissing a cause of action arising under the Act. In deciding the issue, the court quoted directly from the first line of the Act (Civ. Code § 896) and found "[i]n any action seeking recovery of damages arising out of, or related to deficiencies in, the residential construction … , the claimant's claims or causes of action shall be limited to violation of" the standards set out in the Act. The court recognized the statutory exceptions to this rule, such as for claims arising under contract, or any action for fraud, personal injuries, or statutory violations. (Civ. Code., § 943.) However, this result directly conflicts with the Fourth Appellate District's decision in Liberty Mutual, which found homeowners can circumvent the entire Act by simply alleging property damage claims. McMillin rejects Liberty Mutual's "reasoning and outcome" as being inconsistent with the express language of the Act. McMillin found that Liberty Mutual failed to fully analyze the statutory language of the Act, which (on its face) limits any action for construction deficiencies to the requirements of the Act. McMillin concludes the Legislature intended that all construction defect actions (for new residences sold on or after January 1, 2003), are subject to the requirements of the Act, including the prelitigation procedures, regardless of whether a complaint expressly alleges a cause of action under the Act or not. McMillin is a great victory for homebuilders, but battle lines are now clearly drawn between the two appellate districts. McMillin directly conflicts with Liberty Mutual, and because of this conflict, the issue will need to be resolved by the California Supreme Court. Until such review is granted, the conflict will remain and trial courts will likely continue to conflate the issue. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Stephen A. Sunseri, Gatzke Dillon & Balance LLP
    Mr. Sunseri may be contacted at ssunseri@gdandb.com

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!

    September 19, 2022 —
    Risk allocation between the parties is a critical component of any construction contract. Indemnity obligations can be some of the important risk-shifting provisions of any design or construction contract. Indemnity provisions typically require one party, the Indemnitor, to agree to “hold harmless,” and/or reimburse another party, the indemnitee, from claims and liability arising out of the party’s work. Considering the financial consequences that an indemnity provision can have on a construction project, it is critical that all parties to a construction contract know the legal implications of the contract indemnity provisions and understand any limitations in enforcing the indemnity provisions depending on the controlling jurisdiction. While most indemnity clauses and obligations are enforceable, many states have enacted anti-indemnity statutes prohibiting or restricting specific indemnification provisions. These anti-indemnity statutes afford protection to contractors and subcontractors not generally in a position to protect themselves from overly extensive indemnity obligations. This article highlights several examples of indemnity provisions typically seen in construction contracts, the measures are taken by a growing number of states to protect parties with less bargaining power in the form of anti-indemnity statutes, and offers practical considerations when negotiating or drafting indemnity provisions.[1] Reprinted courtesy of Caitlin Kicklighter, Emory Law Student (2024 Graduate), (ConsensusDocs) and Bill Shaughnessy, Jones Walker LLP (ConsensusDocs) Mr. Shaughnessy may be contacted at bshaughnessy@joneswalker.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Federal Judge Strikes Down CDC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium

    March 29, 2021 —
    A federal judge in Texas has declared the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) eviction moratorium unconstitutional, holding that Article I’s power to regulate interstate commerce and enact laws necessary and proper for such regulation does not include the power to suspend residential evictions on a nationwide basis. While the court stopped short of issuing immediate injunctive relief, instead relying on the CDC to “respect the declaratory judgment” and withdraw the Order, the court stated that such relief would be available if the government does not comply with the decision. With this ruling, the most significant prohibition on residential evictions for nonpayment of rent is likely to be lifted, and many residential evictions halted or delayed under the Order may begin in earnest. While additional tenant protections remain in certain locales, this federal ruling increases the likely rate and pace of residential eviction activity across the country. The CDC Eviction Moratorium was a nationwide order enacted under the Trump Administration in an effort to reduce the adverse economic impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on residential tenants, and as a public health measure to prevent displacement of individuals into living situations conducive to the spread of the COVID-19. The Order allowed tenants facing eviction due to financial strains caused by the pandemic to certify in writing to their landlord that they are unable to pay full rent and that eviction would likely lead to homelessness or force the individual into unsafe congregate or shared living quarters. The CDC issued the order under its emergency pandemic powers under the Public Health Service Act. Initially in effect through December 31, 2020, the Order was subsequently extended through March 31, 2021. Reprinted courtesy of Zachary Kessler, Pillsbury, Amanda G. Halter, Pillsbury and Adam Weaver, Pillsbury Mr. Kessler may be contacted at zachary.kessler@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Halter may be contacted at amanda.halter@pillsburylaw.com Mr. Weaver may be contacted at adam.weaver@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of