BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington multi family design expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington slope failure expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington building code 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


    TV Kitchen Remodelers Sued for Shoddy Work

    Construction Law Alert: A Specialty License May Not Be Required If Work Covered By Another License

    Is The Enforceability Of A No-Damage-For-Delay Provision Inappropriate For Summary Judgment

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    Sobering Facts for Construction Safety Day

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Tier 1 and Tier 2 “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2025

    Third Circuit Follows Pennsylvania Law - Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship Does Not Arise from an Occurrence

    North Carolina Should Protect Undocumented Witnesses to Charlotte Scaffolding Deaths, Unions Say

    Contractors May be Entitled to Both Prompt Payment Act Relief and Prejudgment Interest for a Cumulative 24%!

    Contractor Gets Green Light to Fix Two Fractured Girders at Salesforce Transit Center

    NAHB Reports on U.S. Jobs Created from Home Building

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    Rather Than Limit Decision to "That Particular Part" of Developer's Policy Necessary to Bar Coverage, 10th Circuit Renders Questionable Decision on Exclusion j(6)

    Expert Medical Science Causation Testimony Improperly Excluded under Daubert; ID of Sole Cause of Medical Condition Not Required

    Forget Backyard Pools, Build a Swimming Pond Instead

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    DA’s Office Checking Workers Comp Compliance

    Oregon Codifies Tall Wood Buildings

    Voluntary Payments Affirmative Defense Does Not Apply in Contract Cases

    Subcontractors Eye 2022 with Guarded Optimism

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    New York Court Temporarily Enjoins UCC Foreclosure Sale

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

    A Third of U.S. Homebuyers Are Bidding Sight Unseen

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Details of Sealed Whistleblower Charges Over Cuomo Bridge Bolts Burst Into Public View

    Know What You’ve Built: An Interview with Timo Makkonen of Congrid

    Mitigating Mold Exposure in Manufacturing and Multifamily Buildings

    Faulty Workmanship Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage

    Los Angeles Tower Halted Over Earthquake and other Concerns

    New York Court Permits Asbestos Claimants to Proceed Against Insurers with Buyout Agreements

    Former Owner Not Liable for Defects Discovered After Sale

    Flood-Threat Assessment Finds Danger Goes Far Beyond U.S. Homes

    Ready, Fire, Aim: The Importance of Targeting Your Delay Notices

    Fire Consultants Cannot Base Opinions on Speculation

    Homeowners Sued for Failing to Disclose Defects

    Choice of Laws Test Mandates Application of California’s Continuous and Progressive Trigger of Coverage to Asbestos Claims

    Wilke Fleury and Attorneys Recognized as ‘Best Law Firm’ and ‘Best Lawyers’ by U.S. News!

    Mortgage Whistleblower Stands Alone as U.S. Won’t Join Lawsuit

    Do Hurricane-Prone Coastal States Need to Update their Building Codes?

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    Affordable Housing should not be Filled with Defects

    South Carolina Court of Appeals Diverges from Damico Opinion, Sending Recent Construction Defects Cases to Arbitration

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

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in 2021 Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones To Watch!

    California Supreme Court Adopts Vertical Exhaustion for Long-Tail Claims

    Don’t Sign a Contract that Doesn’t Address Covid-19 (Or Pandemics and Epidemics)

    Colorado Trench Collapse Kills Two

    Insurer Obligated to Cover Preventative Remediation of Construction Defects
    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

    Boston’s Tunnel Project Plagued by Water

    August 11, 2011 —

    Boston’s Tip O’Neil Tunnel, part of the “Big Dig” project, is suffering from water leaks which has lead to millions of dollars of damage, according to an article in the Boston Globe. The report quotes Frank DePaola, the highway administrator, as likening the water leaks to “three garden hoses.” The project’s chief engineer notes that those “three garden hoses” add up to 17 million gallons a year.

    Further, the chief engineer reports notes that the leaks could compromise both safety and structural integrity. Problems have included a 110-pound light fixture that fell in February, ventilation ducts clogged with ice during the winter, and mold in utility rooms and ventilation buildings.

    Read the full story…

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

    $6 Million in Punitive Damages for Chinese Drywall

    November 27, 2013 —
    Jeffrey and Elisa Robin earlier were awarded $1.1 million in compensatory damages in their lawsuit against Knauf Plasterboard, the Chinese company which manufactured allegedly tainted drywall used in the Robin’s Coconut Grove, Florida home. Now a jury has awarded the couple an additional $6 million punitive damages. The Robins’ lawyer, Victor Diaz, said it was “the best accomplishment of my legal career.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Mixed Reality for Construction: Applicability and Reality

    July 22, 2019 —
    One technology available to the digital contractor for mapping what’s happening in the physical world with the 3D models is mixed reality. Mixed reality often includes both augmented reality and virtual reality. Preconstruction Phase During the preconstruction design phase, mixed reality can be used for a number of tasks, such as:
    • conducting design iterations;
    • communicating designs to owners;
    • visualizing the impact of design changes;
    • discovering design and coordination clashes; and
    • mocking up virtual interior designs.
    Marketing Mixed reality can also be used to create marketing material, such as a virtual showroom. Imagine being able to show a potential client what the building will look like. For example, the client, wearing mixed-reality glasses, can see the physical neighborhood with the building or can take a virtual “walk” through of an apartment before it it is even completed. Reprinted courtesy of A. Vincent Vasquez, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    August 23, 2021 —
    A bill wending its way through the California Legislature could suddenly make a lot more new housing economically feasible. Known as AB 1401, the legislation would abolish local parking requirements for new residential and commercial developments near bus or train stops. It applies to counties with more than 600,000 residents and cities with more than 75,000 people. The bill does not prohibit or restrict parking. It merely deregulates it, allowing developers to decide what works best for a given project. It opens up the possibility, for example, of providing parking in an off-site garage or lot. It permits tandem parking to save space or subsidized shared ride services. It doesn’t prescribe a one-size-fits-all solution to how buildings can best serve the people who use them, and it allows flexibility as transportation options evolve. Most homeowners and tenants want some sort of parking, but local mandates can be extreme — and extremely expensive. Twenty-one California towns even require more than three parking places for a three-bedroom single-family home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Virginia Postrel, Bloomberg

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    May 24, 2011 —

    Judge Patricia J. Cottrell, ruling on the case Roger Wilkes, et al. v. Shaw Enterprises, LLC, in the Tennessee Court of Appeals, upheld the trial court’s conclusion that “the builder constructed the house in accordance with good building practices even though it was not in strict conformance with the building code.” However, Judge Cottrell directed the lower court to “award to Appellants reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in their first appeal, as determined by the trial court.”

    Judge Cottrell cited in her opinion the contract which specified that the house would be constructed “in accordance with good building practices.” However, after the Wilkes discovered water leakage, the inspections revealed that “that Shaw had not installed through-wall flashing and weep holes when the house was built.” The trial court concluded that:

    “Separate and apart from the flashing and weep holes, the trial court concluded the Wilkeses were entitled to recover damages for the other defects they proved based on the cost of repair estimates introduced during the first and second trials, which the court adjusted for credibility reasons. Thus, the trial court recalculated the amount the Wilkeses were entitled to recover and concluded they were entitled to $17,721 for the value of repairs for defects in violation of good business practices, and an additional 15%, or $2,658.15, for management, overhead, and profit of a licensed contractor. This resulted in a judgment in the amount of $20,370.15. The trial court awarded the Wilkeses attorneys” fees through the Page 9 first trial in the amount of $5,094.78 and discretionary costs in the amount of $1,500. The total judgment following the second trial totaled $26,973.93.”

    In this second appeal, Judge Cottrell concluded, that “the trial court thus did not have the authority to decide the Wilkeses were not entitled to their attorneys” fees and costs incurred in the first appeal.”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Construction Halted in Wisconsin Due to Alleged Bid Issues

    March 26, 2014 —
    A $9 million construction project in Middleton, Wisconsin has been halted due to an allegation that the construction company, Newcomb, did not comply with the advertised bid requirements and they were not the lowest bidder, according to the Wisconsin State Journal. “Dane County Judge Rhonda Lanford issued a temporary restraining order at the request of Associated General Contractors of Wisconsin asking the city to stop work on the…facility,” the Wisconsin State Journal reported. “We are pleased with the court’s decision. Fairness and transparency in public contracting is critical for the industry,” Robert Barker, Associated’s executive vice president, told the Wisconsin State Journal. “The city must abide by the rules so that all bidders are given a fair shake.” However, the city stated that Newcomb was the construction company with the lowest bid in that category. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Illinois Federal Court Determines if Damages Are Too Remote

    July 13, 2020 —
    Foreseeability is a tort concept that tends to permeate several aspects of legal analysis, often causing confusion in litigants’ interpretation of, and courts’ application of, foreseeability to their cases. In Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Progress Rail Services. Corp., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73967 (C.D. Ill.), the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois took on the task of analyzing a case dealing with foreseeability issues to determine if the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty and if the damages were so remote as to violate public policy. The court held that since the defendant’s actions contributed to the risk of harm to the plaintiff and the facts satisfied the four-prong duty test, the defendant owed the plaintiff’s subrogor a duty of reasonable care. It also held that the plaintiff’s damage claim did not open the defendant up to liability that would violate public policy. In the case, an employee of defendant Progress Rail Services Corporation (Progress Rail) was operating a crane at Progress Rail’s Galesburg location on May 7, 2018. The employee struck an overhead power line while working, causing a power disruption to nearby businesses. The plaintiff’s subrogor, Midstate Manufacturing Company (Midstate), was one of the affected businesses, reporting that its Amada hydraulic punch was damaged. Midstate submitted a property damage claim to its carrier, Cincinnati Insurance Company (Cincinnati), who reimbursed it under its policy. Subsequent to its payment, Cincinnati filed suit against Progress Rail in Illinois state court. Progress Rail then removed the case to federal court and filed a motion to dismiss. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lian Skaf, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Skaf may be contacted at skafl@whiteandwilliams.com

    Ninth Circuit Issues Pro-Contractor Licensing Ruling

    July 18, 2018 —
    On July 10, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its much anticipated and a pro-contractor ruling in MP Nexlevel of California, Inc. v. CVIN LLC. The appeal arose from a dispute over the scope of a California specialty contractor’s license and, more particular, involved whether the subcontractor’s performance of certain work was outside the scope of its license constituting a breach of contract and resulting in the contractor not being entitled to payment for its work (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7031(a)). In an unpublished opinion, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the matter, finding that “Nexlevel’s work here was ‘incidental and supplemental’ to the installation of these fiberoptic systems,” as contemplated by Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 16, § 831. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Amy L. Pierce, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
    Ms. Pierce may be contacted at amy.pierce@pillsburylaw.com