BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington building code compliance 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


    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    Fixing That Mistake

    Professional Services Exclusion Bars Coverage After Carbon Monoxide Leak

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    Review of Recent Contractors State License Board Changes

    Proposed Law Protecting Tenants Amended: AB 828 Updated

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

    Federal Court Finds Occurrence for Faulty Workmanship Under Virginia Law

    Toll Brothers Climbs After Builder Reports Higher Sales

    Kiewit Hired as EPC for Fire-Damaged Freeport Gas Terminal Fix

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces New Partners

    Overtime! – When the Statute of Limitations Isn’t Game Over For Your Claim

    A Word to the Wise about Construction Defects

    The “Your Work” Exclusion—Is there a Trend against Coverage?

    As Fracture Questions Remain, Team Raced to Save Mississippi River Bridge

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/16/22) – Backlog Shifts, Green Battery Storage, and Russia-Ukraine Updates

    Contractual Assumption of Liability Does Not Bar Coverage

    The Woodland Hills Office Secures a Total Defense Award on Behalf of their High-End Custom Home Builder Client!

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    New EPA Regulation for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments

    Pennsylvania: Searching Questions Ahead of Oral Argument in Domtar

    The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities From Scratch

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions: A.B. 1701’s Requirement that General Contractors Pay Subcontractor Employee Wages Will Do More Harm Than Good

    Being the Bearer of Bad News (Sounding the Alarm on Construction Issues Early and Often) (Law Note)

    A Duty to Design and Maintain Reasonably Safe Roadways Extends to All Persons. (WA)

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Product Liability Economic Loss Rule and “Other Property” Damage

    Defense Owed for Product Liability Claims That Do Not Amount to Faulty Workmanship

    Thank You for Seven Years of Election to Super Lawyers

    Unpredictable Opinion Regarding Construction Lien (Reinstatement??)

    High Court Could Alter Point-Source Discharge Definition in Taking Clean-Water Case

    Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal Suggests Negligent Repairs to Real Property Are Not Subject to the Statute of Repose

    A Court-Side Seat: Guam’s CERCLA Claim Allowed, a “Roundup” Verdict Upheld, and Judicial Process Privilege Lost

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    Chinese Hunt for Trophy Properties Boosts NYC, London Prices

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    NTSB Outlines Pittsburgh Bridge Structure Specifics, Finding Collapse Cause Will Take Months

    Ireland Said to Plan Home Loans Limits to Prevent Bubble

    Safer Schools Rendered Unsafe Due to Construction Defects

    Coverage Under Builder's Risk Policy Properly Excluded for Damage to Existing Structure Only

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    Congratulations 2019 DE, MA, NJ, NY and PA Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    West Coast Casualty’s 25th Construction Defect Seminar Has Begun

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

    Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause Eliminates Loss from Hurricane

    Ahlers & Cressman’s Top 10 Construction Industry Contract Provisions

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    Contractual Waiver of Consequential Damages

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt
    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

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    September 29, 2021 —
    The Washington State Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lake Hills Invs., LLC v. Rushforth Constr. Co. No. 99119-7, slip op. at 1 (Wash. Sept. 2, 2021) marks the first time in over 50 years that it has ruled on the Spearin doctrine. The Court’s opinion clarified the contractor’s burden when asserting a Spearin defense and affirmed the jury’s verdict in favor of contractor AP Rushforth Construction Company (AP). The decision is a major win for Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC attorneys Scott Sleight, Brett Hill, and Nick Korst, who represented AP throughout its long-running dispute with Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH), including the two-month jury trial and the appeal. Leonard Feldman of Peterson | Wampold | Rosato | Feldman | Luna and Stephanie Messplay of Van Siclen Stocks & Firkins also represented AP on appeal. At trial, the owner—Lake Hills Investments, LLC (LH)—asserted it was entitled to $3 million in liquidated damages and $12.3 million for defects it alleged were caused by AP’s deficient workmanship. AP denied responsibility for the delays and most of the defects and requested payment of $5 million. Regarding LH’s defect claims, AP argued as an affirmative defense that the defects were caused by deficiencies in the plans and specifications provided by LH. This affirmative defense was rooted in the Spearin doctrine, which states that when the contractor follows plans and specifications provided by the owner, the contractor is not responsible for defects caused by the plans and specifications. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Cameron Sheldon, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Ms. Sheldon may be contacted at cameron.sheldon@acslawyers.com

    OSHA Announces Expansion of “Severe Violator Enforcement Program”

    November 15, 2022 —
    (October 28, 2022) - Employers beware! The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is significantly expanding its “Severe Violator Enforcement Program” (SVEP). Employers that are placed into the program by OSHA will be significantly scrutinized, with the potential for very damaging information about their failure to maintain a safe workplace being made public for customers, partners, and vendors to see. As the name suggests, the program is meant to identify, classify, and then stringently monitor employees deemed to be “severe violators” of the OSH Act. According to the OSHA website alert, to be deemed a “severe violator”, the agency must find that the employer has demonstrated “indifference” to the regulations by committing “willful, repeated, or failure-to-abate” violations. Reprinted courtesy of Kip J. Adams, Lewis Brisbois and Steven G. Gatley, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Adams may be contacted at Kip.Adams@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Gatley may be contacted at Steven.Gatley@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Virtual Jury Trials: The Next Wave of Remote Legal Practice

    July 13, 2020 —
    One of the most obvious and unavoidable results of the COVID-19 crisis has been the postponement of jury service and, by extension, all jury trials. Given the inherent difficulties of convening juries in a world of social distancing, it is likely that multiple jurisdictions will be unable to conduct live jury trials for at least the next several months. Recognizing the mounting delay and substantial docket backlog that is attendant to several months without jury trials, one court most recently permitted the litigants, upon consent, to try a new innovation – the nation’s first virtual jury trial conducted entirely on the Zoom platform. More than two dozen potential jurors in Collin County, Texas attended jury selection from home by smartphone, laptop, and tablet, a process that was streamed live on YouTube. The presiding judge occasionally provided prospective jurors technical advice on how to best use their devices. Once selected, the jurors virtually attended a one-day, “summary jury trial” of an insurance dispute in which they heard a condensed version of the case and delivered a non-binding verdict. The parties were then able to gauge how their cases would fare before a jury in a full-scale trial and, with that insight, agreed to proceed to a mediation in an attempt to reach a resolution. Court officials further touted the abbreviated, non-binding experience as an ideal test for the viability of remotely holding jury trials that would result in a final judgment. This real-world test, albeit in a non-binding exercise, may be an indication of things to come, as courts in Indiana and Arizona have already communicated an intention to conduct jury trials remotely once able. Reprinted courtesy of David R. Zaslow, White and Williams and Mark Paladino, White and Williams Mr. Zaslow may be contacted at zaslowd@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Paladino may be contacted at paladinom@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When “Substantially Similar” Means “Fundamentally Identical”: Delaware Court Enforces Related Claim Provision to Deny D&O Coverage for Securities Class Action

    August 10, 2021 —
    A company faces two class action lawsuits—filed by different plaintiffs, complaining of different allegedly wrongful conduct, asserting different causes of action subject to different burdens of proof, and seeking different relief based on different time periods for the alleged harm. Those facts suggest the suits are not “fundamentally identical,” but that is what a Delaware Superior Court recently concluded in barring coverage for a policyholder seeking to recover for a suit the court deemed “related” to an earlier lawsuit first made outside the policy’s coverage period. First Solar Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., No. N20C-10-156 MMJ CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. June 23, 2021). The decision, which is not on all fours with some of the authority upon which it relies, underscores the inherent unpredictability of “related” claim disputes and need for careful analysis of the policy language against the factual and legal bases of the underlying claims. Underlying Shareholder Class Actions and D&O Claims Shareholders of solar panel manufacturer First Solar sued the company and its directors and officers in a class action lawsuit (the “Smilovits Action”) for the class period April 2008 to February 2012. The Smilovits Action asserted federal securities violations arising from First Solar’s alleged misrepresentations about the company’s business strategies, product design, financial strength, and ability to offer solar electricity at comparable rates to conventional energy producers (i.e., achieving “grid parity”), artificially inflated stock price, insider trading, manipulation of solar power metrics, and violations of GAAP accounting standards. First Solar submitted a claim to its D&O insurer, National Union, which provided coverage for the Smilovits Action and exhausted the policy. Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth, Lawrence J. Bracken II, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Mr. Bracken may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    February 23, 2016 —
    The California Supreme Court has shifted gears on so-called “reverse CEQA” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Supreme Court, in a much-anticipated decision, in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Case No. S213478 (December 17, 2015), held that public agencies subject to CEQA are not required to analyze whether existing environmental conditions may impact a proposed project’s future users or residents – also known as “reverse CEQA” or “CEQA in reverse” – as opposed to the more traditional analysis of a proposed project’s impact on the environment, unless: 1. The proposed project risks exacerbating existing environmental hazards – in which case, it is the proposed project’s impact on the environment not the environment’s impact on the proposed project, which compels the evaluation; or 2. A reverse CEQA analysis is already required under statute, for example, on certain airport, school and housing projects. 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

    Self-Storage Magnates Cash In on the Surge in Real Estate

    August 06, 2014 —
    Kelsey Smith is a single mother who works as a waitress in Midvale, Utah, and lives with a roommate in a small apartment in the Sugar House neighborhood of Salt Lake City. Smith, 26, pays $500 a month for daycare for her 3-year-old, which makes it hard to get by on a waitress’s pay. She says she’s had to move to cheaper lodgings six or seven times. Rather than drag all her belongings with her, Smith rents a 10-foot-by-15-foot (3-meter-by-5-meter) self-storage unit, for which she pays $80 a month -- as much as two shifts’ worth of wages and tips. The unit contains furniture and other items she’s accumulated over the years -- “just the things you’d need if you had a home,” she says. “People don’t want to let go.” Millions of Americans are like Kelsey Smith, Bloomberg Markets magazine will report in its September issue. They’ve got furniture and old photos, children’s toys and bric-a-brac that they’re loath to give up, yet they can’t find a place for it in their homes, garages or apartments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hui-yong Yu, Bloomberg
    Hui-yong Yu may be contacted at hyu@bloomberg.net

    Hurricane Damage Not Covered for Home Owner Not Named in Policy

    March 20, 2023 —
    The court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss because, although there was coverage for the property under the mortgagee's policy, the home owner was not a named or additional insured under the policy. Cart v. Great Am. Assur. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6207 (W.D. La. Jan. 12, 2023). Plaintiffs' property was damage by Hurricanes Laura and Delta. Because Plaintiff failed to maintain homeowner's hazard insurance subject to the mortgage, Rushmore Management Services procured a force-placed lender policy on the property through Great American. Plaintiffs filed suit asserting breach contract claims. Great American moved to dismiss. 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

    Mass-Timber Furnished Apartments Fare Well in Fire Tests

    August 24, 2017 —
    Advocates for a code change that would allow taller heavy-timber frames are buoyed by the good performance of mass-timber structures in the first U.S. fire tests on full-scale furnished apartments. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com