BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington fenestration expert witnessSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington building code compliance expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington defective construction 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


    Alaska Supreme Court Finds Insurer Owes No Independent Duty to Injured Party

    Subsequent Purchaser Can Assert Claims for Construction Defects

    PPP Loan Extension Ending Aug. 8

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Loose Bolts Led to Sagging Roof in Construction Defect Claim

    2019’s Biggest Labor and Employment Moves Affecting Construction

    Traub Lieberman Partner Stephen Straus Wins Spoliation Motion in Favor of Defendant

    Eastern District of Pennsylvania Confirms Carrier Owes No Duty to Defend Against Claims for Faulty Workmanship

    Land Planners Not Held to Professional Standard of Care

    Proving Contractor Licensure in California. The Tribe Has Spoken

    U.S. Army Corps Announces Regulatory Program “Modernization” Plan

    Defining a Property Management Agreement

    Deterioration of Bridge Infrastructure Is Increasing Insurance Needs

    Deducting 2018 Real Property Taxes Prepaid in 2017 Comes with Caveats

    The Unthinkable Has Happened. How Should Contractors Respond?

    New Jersey Supreme Court Ruled Condo Association Can’t Reset Clock on Construction Defect Claim

    Suffolk Pauses $1.5B Boston Tower Project for Safety Audit After Fire

    Breaking Down Homeowners Association Laws In California

    Design and Construction Defects Not a Breach of Contract

    Defense Owed to Directors and Officers Despite Insured vs. Insured Exclusion

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 2- Increase the Heat

    Federal Regulatory Recap: A Summary of Recent Rulemaking Actions Taken or Proposed Affecting the Energy Industry

    Contractor Wins in Arbitration Only to Lose Before the Superior Court on Section 7031 Claim

    Miller Act Bond Claims Subject to “Pay If Paid”. . . Sometimes

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Confidence Among U.S. Homebuilders Declines to Eight-Month Low

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    The “Unavailability Exception” is Unavailable to Policyholders, According to New York Court of Appeals

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (03/08/23) – Updates on U.S. Mortgage Applications, the Inflation Reduction Act, and Multifamily Sector

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    No Coverage for Tenant's Breach of Contract Claims

    Muir named Brown and Caldwell Eastern leader

    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose. Court Finds Indemnity Provision Went Too Far

    Judge Who Oversees Mass. Asbestos Docket Takes New Role As Chief Justice of Superior Court

    Blackouts Require a New Look at Backup Power

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Business Interruption Claim Denied

    Elizabeth Lofts Condo Owners Settle with Plumbing Supplier

    Court Says KBR Construction Costs in Iraq were Unreasonable

    Global Emissions From Buildings, Construction Climb to Record Levels

    Does Your 998 Offer to Compromise Include Attorneys’ Fees and Costs?

    West Virginia Wild: Crews Carve Out Corridor H Through the Appalachian Mountains

    NY Pay-to-Play Charges Dropped Against LPCiminelli Executive As Another Pleads Guilty

    PFAS: From Happy Mistake to Ubiquity to Toxic Liability (But is there coverage?)

    Products Liability Law – Application of Economic Loss Rule

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    Construction Defect Claim over LAX Runways
    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

    PA Superior Court Provides Clarification on Definition of CGL “Occurrence” When Property Damage Is Caused by Faulty Building Conditions

    September 30, 2019 —
    The standard for an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy has been addressed on several occasions by Pennsylvania courts when an insured has allegedly performed faulty workmanship on a construction project. Specifically, in Pennsylvania, a claim for damages arising from an insured’s performance of faulty workmanship pursuant to a construction contract, where the only damage is to property supplied by the insured or worked on by the insured, does not constitute an “occurrence” under the standard commercial general liability insurance policy definition. But what about the circumstance when the insured has failed to perform contractual duties where the claim is for property damage to property not supplied by the insured or unrelated to the service the insured contracted to provide? The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently addressed this question in Pennsylvania Manufacturers Indemnity Co. v. Pottstown Industrial Complex LP, No. 3489 EDA 2018, 2019 Pa. Super. 223, 2019 Pa. Super. LEXIS 729* (Pa. Super. 2019). Pottstown Industrial Complex arose out of an underlying dispute between a landlord and a commercial tenant who had leased space to store its product inventory. The tenant alleged that the landlord was responsible under the lease for keeping the roof “in serviceable condition in repair.” Notwithstanding this responsibility, the tenant alleged that the landlord failed to properly maintain and repair the roof, resulting in leaks and flooding during four separate rainstorms, destroying over $700,000 in inventory. The tenant specifically alleged that the floods were caused by poor caulking of the roof, gaps and separations in the roofing membrane, undersized drain openings, and accumulated debris and clogged drains. The insurer filed a declaratory judgment action, seeking a determination that there was no coverage under a commercial general liability policy issued to the landlord. Following a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the trial court entered an order in favor of the insurer, holding that allegations of inadequate roof repairs were claims for faulty workmanship and were not covered under Kvaerner Metals Division of Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co., 908 A.2d 888 (Pa. 2006) and Millers Capital Insurance Co. v. Gambone Brothers Development Co., 941 A.2d 706 (Pa. Super. 2007). Reprinted courtesy of Anthony Miscioscia, White and Williams LLP and Konrad Krebs, White and Williams LLP Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Krebs may be contacted at krebsk@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Office REITs in U.S. Plan the Most Construction in Decade

    July 09, 2014 —
    Office buildings in top U.S. markets are getting so expensive that landlords are choosing to build rather than buy, spurring the most development by real estate investment trusts in at least a decade. Office REITs, led by Boston Properties Inc. (BXP), Vornado Realty Trust (VNO) and Kilroy Realty Corp. (KRC), are planning to plow almost $11 billion into new projects, triple the amount just two years ago and the most in data going back to 2004, according to research firm Green Street Advisors Inc. Much of that is focused on the coasts, including San Francisco and New York, the areas with the most demand from both tenants and investors. Prices for office buildings in major markets have surged past peak levels, lifted in part by sovereign-wealth funds and pensions willing to accept lower yields than other investors because they are seeking safe investments. For REITs, which have to answer to shareholders seeking higher returns, building is often a better option than competing with institutional buyers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Louis, Bloomberg
    Mr. Louis may be contacted at blouis1@bloomberg.net

    Motion to Dismiss Insurer's Counterclaim for Construction Defects Is Granted

    June 29, 2017 —
    The court granted the insured's motion to dismiss the insurer's counterclaim arising out of construction defects. Centrex Homes v. Zurich Specialties London Limited, et al., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77212 (D. Nev. May 19, 2017). Centrex, the general contractor, was sued by homeowners in a residential development known as Liberty Hill Estates. The suit alleged that defective work had been performed by Centrex's subcontractors, one of which was Valley Concrete Company, Inc. The insurer had issued a policy to Valley and Centrex was an additional insured. The insurer agreed to defend, but only paid a portion of the defense fees and costs because the policy only covered Centrex as to liability arising from Valley's work. The insurer refused to pay defense costs incurred prior to March 28, 2012 the date of notice of claims arising from Valley's work. Centrex then filed suit against the insurer alleging breach of contract and bad faith. The insurer filed a counterclaim seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend. The insurer claimed that Centrex failed to cooperate by unilaterally switching counsel without prior notification to the insurer. This deprived the insurer of the right to control the defense and discharged the insurer's obligations under the policy. Centrex moved to dismiss the counterclaim. 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 Most Expensive Apartment Listings in New York That Are Not in Manhattan

    August 26, 2015 —
    Apartments for very wealthy New Yorkers have remained mostly within the city’s smallest borough. Until now. The record price for a Brooklyn home broke the $15 million threshold this summer, and by now it’s widely accepted that New York’s outer boroughs are not much of a bargain, growing further out of reach for the aspiring homeowner. The rush of new construction in gentrifying neighborhoods has pushed up the price of land, and that’s caused construction costs to rise, too. Eventually, to make a profit, developers have to build luxury buildings, according to Jonathan Miller, the president of New York appraiser Miller Samuel. “We have this perfect storm,” he says. “Everybody gets the same idea at the same time, so materials and labor are at a premium. Throw in the high price of land at each locale, and you’ve got to build a luxury product.” Reprinted courtesy of James Tarmy, Bloomberg and Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Broker's Motion for Summary Judgment on Negligence Claim Denied

    July 30, 2018 —
    After being sued for negligence for failing to secure proper coverage, the broker was unsuccessful in seeking dismissal by way of summary judgment. Liverman Metal Recycling, Inc. v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87957 (E.D. N.C. May 25, 2018). Plaintiffs were two companies, Empire and Liverman, that processed scrap metal. They were in the process of merging under a management plan by which Empire would acquire Liverman. As part of the plan, Empire's employees were moved on to Liverman's payroll processing system. Concurrently, Liverman renewed its workmen's compensation policy. Defendant Arthur J. Gallagher & Company, an insurance broker, handled the renewal with the insurer, Bridgefield Insurance Company. 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

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    July 20, 2011 —

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled on July 8 in the case of Rollander Enterprises, Inc. v. H.C. Nutting Co. Judge Baily wrote the opinion affirming the decision of the trial court.

    The case involved an unfinished condominium complex, the Slopes of Greendale, in Greendale, Indiana. Rollander is a real estate development company incorporated in Ohio. One of the issues in the case was whether the case should be settled in the Indiana courts or be tried in Ohio. The project was owned by a special purpose entity limited liability corporation incorporated in Indiana.

    Rollander hired Nutting to determine the geological composition of the site. Nutting’s report described the site as “a medium plastic clay containing pieces of shale and limestone.” The court summarized this as corresponding with “slope instability and landslides.” Rollander then hired Nutting to design the retaining walls, which were constructed by Scherziner Drilling.

    After cracking was discovered on State Route 1, the walls were discovered to be inadequate. More dirt was brought in and a system of tie-backs was designed to anchor the walls. Not only were the tie-backs unsightly, local officials would not approve the complex for occupancy. Further, the failure of the wall below one building lead to damage of that building.

    The court concluded that since almost all events occurred in Indiana, they rejected Rollander’s contention that the case should be tried in Ohio. Further, the court notes “the last event making Nutting potentially liable on both claims was an injury that occurred in Indiana and consequently, under the lex loci delicti analysis, Indiana law applies.”

    Nor did the court find that Nutting was responsible for the damage to the rest of the project, citing an Indiana Supreme Court ruling, that “there is no liability in tort to the owner of a major construction project for pure economic loss caused unintentionally by contractors, subcontractors, engineers, design professionals, or others engaged in the project with whom the project owner, whether or not technically in privity of contract, is connected through a network or chain of contracts.”

    The court concluded:

    Because Rollander was in contractual privity with Nutting, and Indy was connected to Nutting through a chain of contracts and no exception applies, the economic loss rule precludes their recovery in tort. Damage to Building B was not damage to "other property," and the negligent misrepresentation exception to the economic loss rule is inapplicable on these facts. The trial court therefore did not abuse its discretion by entering judgment on the evidence in favor of Nutting on the Appellants' negligence and negligent misrepresentation claims.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    February 11, 2019 —
    The Law Clinic offers legal advice on digitalization to built environment innovators and experimenters and in the process helps lawmakers find the pain points in legislation. In April 2018 the Finnish Ministry of the Environment launched an experimental legal service for real estate and construction professionals, municipalities, and lawmakers. The cost-free service is like a helpdesk for anyone who has questions about real estate and construction laws and regulations and their interpretation as it applies to new digital processes. The Law Clinic is part of the national KIRA-digi project, which includes 138 experiments, many of which need legal advice for their execution. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    March 22, 2018 —
    Based on recent fire test results, mass timber groups have adjusted product certification standards to require the use of cross-laminated timber with structural adhesives tested to demonstrate better fire performance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record
    Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com