BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington building code compliance expert witnessSeattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expertsSeattle Washington structural concrete expert
    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


    Standard Lifetime Shingle Warranties Aren’t Forever

    California Court of Appeal Adopts Horizontal Exhaustion Rule

    Emerging Trends in Shortened Statutes of Limitations and Statutes of Repose

    Fixing That Mistake

    Predicting Our Future with Andrew Weinreich

    Another TV Fried as Georgia Leads U.S. in Lightning Costs

    The Right to Repair Act Means What it Says and Says What it Means

    Massachusetts Appellate Court Confirms Construction Defects are Not Covered Under Commercial General Liability Policies

    California Supreme Court Declares that Exclusionary Rule for Failing to Comply with Expert Witness Disclosures Applies at the Summary Judgment Stage

    Spain Risks €10.6 Billion Flood Damage Bill, Sanchez Says

    A New Statute of Limitations on Construction Claims by VA State Agencies?

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Insurers' Motion to Determine Lack of Occurrence Fails

    Follow Up on Continental Western v. Shay Construction

    Don’t Ignore a Notice of Contest of Lien

    10-story Mass Timber 'Rocking' Frame Sails Through Seismic Shake Tests

    Parking Reform Takes Off on the West Coast

    New Executive Order: Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All

    The Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on Construction Businesses

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    First Look at Long List of AEC Firms Receiving PPP Loans

    Conspirators Bilked Homeowners in Nevada Construction Defect Claims

    Harmon Tower Construction Defects Update: Who’s To Blame?

    Chimney Collapses at South African Utility’s Unfinished $13 Billion Power Plant

    Update – Property Owner’s Defense Goes up in Smoke in Careless Smoking Case

    Spearin Doctrine as an Affirmative Defense

    Irene May Benefit Construction Industry

    Comply with your Insurance Policy's Conditions Precedent (Post-Loss Obligations)

    We Knew Concrete Could Absorb Carbon—New Study Tells How Much

    Coverage Exists for Landlord as Additional Insured

    Aurora Joins other Colorado Cities by Adding a Construction Defect Ordinance

    10 Safety Tips for General Contractors

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

    Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020: Yet Another Reason to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    Forensic Team Finds Fault with Concrete Slabs in Oroville Dam Failure

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

    No Signature, No Problem: Texas Court Holds Contractual Subrogation Waiver Still Enforceable

    DOE Abruptly Cancels $13B Cleanup Award to BWXT-Fluor Team

    Definitions Matter in Illinois: Tenant Held Liable Only for Damage to Apartment Unit

    Is Privity of Contract with the Owner a Requirement of a Valid Mechanic’s Lien? Not for GC’s

    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    Toll Brothers Honored at the Shore Builders Association of Central New Jersey Awards

    Hake Law Attorneys Join National Law Firm Wilson Elser

    Wharf Holdings to Sell Entire Sino-Ocean Stake for $284 Million

    Utah Digs Deep and Finds “Design Defect” Includes Pre-Construction Geotechnical Reports

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    “I Didn’t Sign That!” – Applicability of Waivers of Subrogation to Non-Signatory Third Parties

    Court Holds That Public Entity Can Unilaterally Replace Subcontractor Under California’s Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act
    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

    Construction Defect Case Not Over, Despite Summary Judgment

    November 07, 2012 —
    The Supreme Court of Oregon has concluded in an en banc decision that a motion to reconsider a summary judgment is not a motion for a new trial. In coming to their conclusion the court overturned an earlier Oregon Supreme Court case, Carter v. U.S. National Bank. Although the decision does not bear on construction defects, the underlying case did. Due to the decision, these claims can now be evaluated in a trial. The case, Association of Unit Owners of Timbercrest Condominiums v. Warren, came about after an apartment complex was converted into condominium units. The developers hired Big Al’s Construction for some of the remodeling work. The condominium association later sued the developer and the contractor over claims of construction defects. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, which the court granted. But that wasn’t the end of things. The plaintiff soon filed a “motion to reconsider,” noting that the summary judgment seemed to be in conflict with both law and other recent rulings, and additionally, the grounds for the decision were not in the order. The judge then notified the parties that the court had “pulled the trigger too quickly” and had seven questions for the parties to answer. The court dismissed all claims against the defendants. The defendants filed their responses, objecting that that “‘there is no such thing’ as a motion for reconsideration.” Further, while “the rules do allow for post-judgment review of pre-judgment rulings through a motion for a new trial,” the plaintiffs had not filed for a new trial. But did they need one? They did file an appeal. The judge in the case admitted that there was no such thing as a motion to reconsider, and felt bad about prematurely signing the judgment. The case was sent to the Court of Appeals to determine if the motion to reconsider was a request for a new trial. The Court of Appeals concurred. In reviewing the decision, the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that there were a maximum of three questions to address. Was the motion for reconsideration a motion for a new trial? If so, was the later notice of appeal premature? And if so, was the plaintiff required to file a new appeal? The court determined that the answer to the first question was no. Prior decisions pointed to the conclusion “that a motion for reconsideration of a summary judgment amounts to a motion for a new trial,” but here the court concluded that “our prior cases erred,” and turned to the summary judgment rule for clarification. The court noted that “the rule contemplates that summary judgment and trial are separate and distinct events.” With this conclusion, the Oregon Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Quick Note: Third-Party Can Bring Common Law Bad Faith Claim

    July 01, 2019 —
    A third-party claimant may bring a common law bad faith claim against a defendant’s liability insurer. Mccullough v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, 2019 WL 2076192, *2 (S.D.Fla. 2019). “A bad faith claim may be brought by a third party absent an assignment from the [defendant] insured.” Id. This can only be done in the third-party bad faith context with the argument that the insurer’s “bad faith” conduct resulted in a judgment against the defendant-insured in excess of the policy limits. However, in any third-party bad faith claim (and, really, bad faith claim in general), coverage must first be determined under the policy. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    'Taylor Swift Is an Economic Phenomenon': CE's Q1 2024 Economic Update and Forecast

    April 29, 2024 —

    On March 27, Construction Executive presented its "2024 Q1 Economic Update and Forecast," hosted by ABC Chief Economist Anirban Basu. If you've attended previous versions of this webinar, you're familiar with Basu’s pragmatic approach to the economics of the construction industry and his penchant for predicting recession. But this quarter, he opted for an almost-optimistic approach and hinted at walking back his thoughts on recession. Read the most quotable moments, new poll results and top takeaways from the presentation below.

    POLL RESULTS: Q1 2024 vs. Q4 2023 Poll 1: Which of these is the leading challenge for your company today?

    Supply chain and/or materials issues

    Skills/worker shortage

    Insufficient demand for construction services

    Availability of financing for projects/project work

    None of the above

    December 2023March 2024
    10% 7%
    57% 60%
    11% 11%
    19% 17%
    3% 6%

    Reprinted courtesy of Grace Calengor, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.

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

    Federal Courts Keep Chipping Away at the CDC Eviction Moratorium

    March 22, 2021 —
    In a March 10 decision, a federal court in Cleveland blocked the national eviction moratorium, making it the second court to challenge the emergency measure implemented under President Donald Trump and extended by the Biden administration. The order clears the way for courts and landlords to resume evictions against tenants across much of Ohio. But the landlord groups who brought the suit believe that the decision could have a broader national application, setting the stage for an earlier-than-anticipated resumption of eviction activity before the ban expires on March 31. The judge ruled that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which introduced its ban on evictions in September, lacks the authority to enact such a policy. While the court stopped short of issuing an injunction against the CDC ban, its decision goes further than the Texas court that made a similar call late in February. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kriston Capps, Bloomberg

    Does the New Jersey Right-To-Repair Law Omit Too Many Construction Defects?

    January 06, 2012 —

    A post on the blog of Liberty Building Forensics Group find fault with the New Jersey Home Warranty and Builders’ Registration Act for not being stringent enough. The poster notes the coverage given under the bill. In the first year, builders are responsible to remedy faulty workmanship and materials and major structural defects. While other protections expire in the first or second year, there is a ten year coverage of major construction defects.

    The blogger finds fault with the exclusion New Jersey law places on these claims, arguing that “due to the stringent definition of ‘major construction defects,” the warranty affords no coverage unless the house is practically collapsing.” The bill excludes leaks, cracks, and mold, and further limits claims if the homeowner has failed to inform the builder or insurer of defects, failure to maintain the home, and alterations made by the homeowner.

    The intent of the New Jersey law is given as “requiring that newly constructed homes conform to certain construction and quality standards as well as to provide buyers of new homes with insurance-backed warranty protection in the event such standards are not met.” It’s argued in the piece that it instead serves to “strip homeowners of any meaningful means of recovery for discovered construction defects.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Construction Law Client Alert: California’s Right to Repair Act (SB 800) Takes Another Hit, Then Fights Back

    February 25, 2014 —
    Last week, the California appellate courts decided two cases with ramifications under the Right to Repair Act. The first case, Burch, addresses whether the Right to Repair Act is the exclusive remedy for the homeowner. The second case, KB Home, addresses a situation where a homeowner or the homeowner's insurer fails to follow the procedures under the Right to Repair Act. Last August, the Fourth Appellate District announced its decision in Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98 holding that SB 800 is not a homeowner’s exclusive remedy in situations where defects cause actual damage. Many lawyers believed that Liberty Mutual would be a one-off because of its facts – it was a subrogation case brought by an insurance company. So much for that. Now the Second Appellate District is getting into the act. In Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al., the Second Appellate District overturned an order granting summary adjudication in favor of a developer, general contractor, and their respective owners, in a construction defect action brought by a residential homeowner. The trial court found that the Right to Repair Act precluded the homeowner’s negligence and implied warranty claims but the Court of Appeal reversed. Reprinted courtesy of Steven M. Cvitanovic, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP and Whitney L. Stefko, Haight Brown & Bonesteel, LLP Mr. Cvitanovic may be contacted at scvitanovic@hbblaw.com, Ms. Stefko may be contacted at wstefko@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Governor Signs AB5 Into Law — Reshaping California's Independent Contractor Classification Landscape

    December 02, 2019 —
    Today, Governor Gavin Newsom signed California Assembly Bill 5 (“AB5”), controversial legislation which will have a substantial impact on California employers when it goes into effect on January 1, 2020. AB5 enacts into a statute last year’s California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), and the Court’s three-part standard (the “ABC test”) for determining whether a worker may be classified as an employee or an independent contractor. Under the ABC test established in Dynamex and now under AB5, a worker may be properly considered an independent contractor only if the hiring entity establishes all three of the following: (A) that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hirer in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of such work and in fact; (B) that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and (C) that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed for the hiring entity. Reprinted courtesy of Eric C. Sohlgren, Payne & Fears and Matthew C. Lewis, Payne & Fears Mr. Sohlgren may be contacted at ecs@paynefears.com Mr. Lewis may be contacted at mcl@paynefears.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    On the Ten Year Anniversary of the JOBS Act A Look-Back at the Development of Crowdfunding

    May 02, 2022 —
    Last month marked the ten-year anniversary of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, which was signed into law by President Obama on April 5, 2012. On May 16, 2016, Title III of the JOBS Act was enacted, as the final piece of the JOBS Act, which gave businesses better access to crowdfunding tactics due to the ability to raise funds based on equity. Today, the JOBS Act and the impact of equity crowdfunding more generally has grown among multiple industries, from entertainment and technology to real estate and construction, and has come a long way from the non-equity crowdfunding of Kickstarter and Indiegogo. So what have been the powers that businesses gained from Title III of the JOBS Act? What has been the impact of the last ten years? Where do businesses go from here to better utilize this source of funding? WHAT ARE THE CROWDFUNDING POWERS GIVEN BY THE JOBS ACT? The main difference and change that the JOBS Act had on the field of "crowdfunding" was that for the first time, unaccredited investors could obtain equity stakes in businesses through online solicitations. However, a business was still required to go through the proper approved channels, like accredited crowdfunding portals to solicit and receive funding. Prior to this, crowdfunding had gotten more of an impact and reputation from platforms like Kickstarter and Indiegogo, platforms that benefitted creative works or could act as a "pre-order" system with no guaranty of performance or quality of goods by the party seeking funds. Reprinted courtesy of J. Kyle Janecek, Newmeyer Dillion and Jeffrey M. Dennis, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Janecek may be contacted at kyle.janecek@ndlf.com Mr. Dennis may be contacted at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of