BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witness public projectsSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington construction scheduling 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


    The 411 on the New 415 Location of the Golden State Warriors

    Reconciling Prompt Payments and Withholding of Retention Payments

    Allegations of Actual Property Damage Necessary to Invoke Duty to Defend

    The New Jersey Theme Park Where Kids’ Backhoe Dreams Come True

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Ex-San Francisco DPW Director Sentenced to Seven Years in Corruption Case

    Another Reason to Always Respond (or Hensel Phelps Wins One!)

    Fifth Circuit Certifies Questions to Texas Supreme Court on Concurrent Causation Doctrine

    Construction Demand Unsteady, Gains in Some Regions

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    State Supreme Court Cases Highlight Importance of Wording in Earth Movement Exclusions

    Malerie Anderson Named to D Magazine’s 2023 Best Lawyers Under 40

    California Contractor License Bonds to Increase in 2016

    Construction Contract Clauses Only a Grinch Would Love – Part 4

    Common Law Indemnification - A Primer

    Subcontractor’s Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    The Cheapest Place to Buy a House in the Hamptons

    Supreme Court of Canada Broadly Interprets Exception to Faulty Workmanship Exclusion

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    Industry Groups Decry Jan. 6 Riot; DOT Chief Chao Steps Down in Protest

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

    Green Investigations Are Here: U.S. Department of Justice Turns Towards Environmental Enforcement Actions, Deprioritizes Compliance Assistance

    Hunton Insurance Coverage Partner Lawrence J. Bracken II Awarded Emory Public Interest Committee’s 2024 Lifetime Commitment to Public Service Award

    Res Judicata Bars Insured from Challenging Insurer's Use of Schedule to Deduct Depreciation from the Loss

    Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds "Collapse" Provisions Ambiguous

    Alleged Defective Water Pump Leads to 900K in Damages

    No Coverage for Foundation Collapse

    Pennsylvania Court Extends Construction Defect Protections to Subsequent Buyers

    Nevada’s Home Building Industry can Breathe Easier: No Action on SB250 Leaves Current Attorney’s Fees Provision Intact

    A Court-Side Seat: Clean Air, Clean Water, Endangered Species and Deliberative Process Privilege

    Sources of Insurance Recovery for Emerging PFAS Claims

    Limiting Liability: Three Clauses to Consider in your Next Construction Contract

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Time To “Construct” New Social Media Policies

    OSHA’s New Severe Injury and Fatality Reporting Requirements, Are You Ready?

    Illinois Court Determines Insurer Must Defend Negligent Misrepresentation Claim

    5 Impressive Construction Projects in North Carolina

    Traub Lieberman Partner Greg Pennington Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    Mechanic’s Liens- Big Exception

    Patent or Latent: An Important Question in Construction Defects

    Preserving Lien Rights on Private Projects in Washington: Three Common Mistakes to Avoid

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    Unintended Consequences of New Building Products and Services

    Is Your Home Improvement Contract Putting You At Risk?

    Toolbox Talk Series Recap – Arbitration Motion Practice
    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. Leveraging 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

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    February 05, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- U.K. construction growth unexpectedly accelerated last month as housing strengthened and civil engineering bounced back from a contraction. Markit Economics said its Purchasing Managers’ Index rose to 59.1 from 57.6 in December. A reading above 50 indicates expansion. Economists forecast the gauge would fall to 57, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Beardsworth, Bloomberg
    Mr. Beardsworth may be contacted at tbeardsworth@bloomberg.net

    Saudi Arabia Awards Contracts for Megacity Neom’s Worker Housing

    September 16, 2019 —
    Saudi Arabia has awarded to two Saudi firms contracts to build worker housing for its futuristic mega-city called Neom, as plans for the $500 billion project move forward despite skepticism from investors. Tamimi Group and Saudi Arabian Trading & Construction Co. won contracts to finance, build and operate three residential areas with capacity to house 30,000 people, Neom said in a statement on Sunday. The areas will be part of a so-called “Construction Village,” which Neom later plans to expand to accommodate more than 100,000 residents, it said. Neom did not say how much the contracts were worth. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Vivian Nereim, Bloomberg

    Revisiting Statutory Offers to Compromise

    August 28, 2023 —
    The fourth appellate district published an opinion earlier this year in Smalley v. Subaru of America, Inc. (2022) 87 Cal.App.5th 450 that serves as an excellent refresher on requirements of the “998 Offer,” or a statutory offer to compromise pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) §998. In Smalley, set in the context of a Lemon Law action, Defendant Subaru made a 998 Offer for $35,001.00, together with attorneys’ fees and costs totaling either $10,000.00 or costs and reasonably incurred attorneys’ fees, in an amount to be determined by the Court. (Smalley, supra, 87 Cal.App.5th at 454.) Plaintiff objected that the offer was not reasonable and the case proceeded to trial. At trial, a jury found in favor of Plaintiff and awarded him a total judgment award of $27,555.74 – far short of the $35,001.00 offer. The trial court found Plaintiff had failed to beat the 998 at trial and that Subaru’s earlier 998 offer was reasonable. Plaintiff appealed the post-judgment order awarding Plaintiff pre-offer costs and Defendant post-offer costs on the grounds that the 998 was not reasonable in that it did not specify whether Plaintiff would be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of a motion for attorneys’ fees. The fourth district affirmed the trial court’s order and engaged in a helpful review of 998 requirements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kathryne Baldwin, Wilke Fleury
    Ms. Baldwin may be contacted at kbaldwin@wilkefleury.com

    Georgia Coal-to-Solar Pivot Shows the Way on Climate Regs

    July 02, 2014 —
    Georgia small-business owner Julian Smith keeps hearing that the Obama administration’s latest climate regulations will drive up local electric bills. He doesn’t believe the prediction, but he isn’t arguing: The fears are doing wonders for his solar-panel installation company. “My phone is blowing up with new customers,” Smith, owner of SolarSmith LLC of Savannah, said in an interview. “It turns out that if you tell everybody the amount they will spend on electricity will skyrocket, they will believe you.” In Smith’s home state, as in the rest of the nation, businesses and consumers are struggling to size up competing claims about the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to cut carbon pollution from power plants, released June 2. The proposed regulations are among the most sweeping and complex in the EPA’s history, promising to revamp the way electricity has been generated and distributed for a century. Mr. Drajem may be contacted at mdrajem@bloomberg.net; Ms. Newkirk may be contacted at mnewkirk@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Mark Drajem and Margaret Newkirk, Bloomberg

    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    June 18, 2019 —
    In an earlier posting I discussed the difference between first-party spoliation of evidence and third-party spoliation of evidence. There is NO independent cause of action for first-party spoliation of evidence because that can be dealt with directly in the underlying lawsuit. This deals with the assertion that an actual party to a lawsuit spoiled evidence. 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

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

    April 15, 2014 —
    Slack demand for home loans continued to drag on earnings at Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) and JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) as the two largest U.S. mortgage lenders grappled for pieces of a shrunken market. Even as interest rates hovered near historically low levels, new home loans tumbled 67 percent to $36 billion in the first quarter at San Francisco-based Wells Fargo, the biggest originator. JPMorgan posted a 68 percent drop to $17 billion, and the bank predicted it would lose money on mortgage production for the full year. Both lenders are paring staff to keep expenses in line with demand for loans, which has waned as investors and cash buyers dominate some sales. New York-based JPMorgan said jobs at its mortgage business declined 14,000, or 30 percent, since the start of last year. Wells Fargo set plans to cut 1,100 positions in the most recent three months, which ranked as its worst first quarter for mortgage revenue since 2008. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zachary Tracer, Bloomberg
    Mr. Tracer may be contacted at ztracer1@bloomberg.net

    Fifth Circuit Finds Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    March 14, 2022 —
    Reversing the judgment of the district court, the Fifth Circuit found the insurer owed a defense in a construction defect case. Siplast, Inc. v. Emplrs Mut. Cas. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 795 (5th Cir. Jan. 11, 2022). The Archdiocese of New York sued various parties for a roofing project at a high school in the Bronx. Siplast, the roofing manufacturer, was included as a defendant. The underlying lawsuit arose from the Archdiocese purchase of a roof membrane system from Siplast. Siplast guaranteed that the roof membrane system would remain "in a watertight condition for a period of 20 years . . . or Siplast will repair the Roof Membrane System at its own expense." After installation of the roof, school officials noticed water damage in the ceiling tiles throughout the school after a rain storm. Siplast attempted to repair the damage, but was unsuccessful. Siplast later informed the Archdiocese that the guarantee would not be honored regarding any permanent improvements of the roof. The Archdiocese filed suit against Siplast and the installing contractor. The cause of action against Siplast was for breach of the guarantee. 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

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate

    January 17, 2022 —
    The United States Supreme Court today stayed enforcement of the OSHA emergency temporary standard (ETS) requiring employers with 100 or more employees to require employees either be “fully vaccinated” against COVID-19 or submit to weekly testing. The ruling immediately stops enforcement of the rule which had gone into effect on January 10, 2022. Today’s order raises significant doubt as to whether the ETS requirement will ever take effect in its current form. A 6 to 3 majority of the Supreme Court justices issued the profound statement that the parties opposed to the rule “are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Secretary lacked authority to impose the mandate.” The Court went on to state that the OSH Act does not authorize the agency to “set . . . broad public health measures,” such as the found in the current emergency standard. Reprinted courtesy of Stephen E. Irving, Peckar & Abramson, Kevin J. O’Connor, Peckar & Abramson, Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson and Lauren Rayner Davis, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Irving may be contacted at sirving@pecklaw.com Mr. O'Connor may be contacted at koconnor@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Ms. Davis may be contacted at ldavis@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of