BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction expert testimonySeattle Washington building consultant expertSeattle Washington defective construction expertSeattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle 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


    Thank You for Seven Years of Election to Super Lawyers

    CSLB “Fast Facts” for Online Home Improvement Marketplaces

    Release Of “Unknown” Claim Does Not Bar Release Of “Unaccrued” Claim: Fair Or Unfair?

    Scaffolding Purchase Suggests No New Building for Board of Equalization

    ASCE Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2024

    The California Legislature Return the Power Back to the People by Passing the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018

    A Court-Side Seat: Permit Shields, Hurricane Harvey and the Decriminalization of “Incidental Taking”

    Issues to Watch Out for When Managing Remote Workers

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Kept Climbing in January

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    Crossrail Audit Blames Busted Budget and Schedule on Mismanagement

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Arbitration: For Whom the Statute of Limitations Does Not Toll in Pennsylvania

    Court Upholds Denial of Collapse Coverage Where Building Still Stands

    The Future for Tall Buildings Could Be Greener

    GSA Releases Updated Standards to Accelerate Federal Buildings Toward Zero Emissions

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    West Virginia Couple Claim Defects in Manufactured Home

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    Building 47 Bridges in Two Years

    English High Court Finds That Business-Interruption Insurance Can Cover COVID-19 Losses

    A Look at Business and Professions Code Section 7031

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    Home Prices Beat Estimates With 0.8% Gain in November

    Insurer's Motion in Limine to Dismiss Case for Lack of Expert Denied

    Earth Movement Exclusion Precludes Coverage

    Detroit Craftsmen Sift House Rubble in Quest for Treasured Wood

    Beth Cook Expands Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    Alabama Supreme Court Reverses Determination of Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Loss Caused by Theft, Continuous Water Discharge Not Covered

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

    Florida’s New Civil Remedies Act – Bulletpoints As to How It Impacts Construction

    Policyholder Fails to Build Adequate Record to Support Bad Faith Claim

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    DC Circuit Upholds EPA’s Latest RCRA Recycling Rule

    Business and Professions Code Section 7031, Demurrers, and Just How Much You Can Dance

    Can a Non-Signatory Invoke an Arbitration Provision?

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    Duty to Defend Affirmed in Connecticut Construction Defect Case

    Three White and Williams Lawyers Named Top Lawyers by Delaware Today

    Dave McLain included in the 2023 edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    In Review: SCOTUS Environmental and Administrative Decisions in the 2020 Term

    Court Denies Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Collapse Claim

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    Congress Addresses Homebuilding Credit Crunch

    Drone Operation in a Construction Zone

    If You Purchase a House at an HOA Lien Foreclosure, Are You Entitled to Excess Sale Proceeds?

    2017 California Construction Law Update
    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

    Claim for Collapse After Demolition of Building Fails

    January 09, 2023 —
    After several city citations and the eventual demolition of the insureds' apartment building, their claim for coverage based on collapse was unsuccessful. Barker v. AmGuard Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 202069 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 7, 2022). The plaintiffs purchased a three-story multi-family apartment building on March 9, 2009. Prior to the purchase, steel beams were installed in the basement along the east and south walls. By 2013, the south and east walls were leaning.  On March 13, 2017, the city building inspector observed "the foundation failing in several areas and deflection in the south wall." The building inspector issued a citation for a pubic nuisance in violation of the City Code. This was followed by several more citations against plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' inspector reported the basement walls were experiencing "extensive lateral deflections primarily due to the inadequate design of the basement walls."  Plaintiffs understood the issues to be "cosmetic.'" They had no work done on the property besides aesthetic upgrades. After additional citations were entered, the building was ordered demolished. 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

    Buyers Are Flocking to NYC’s Suburbs. Too Bad There Aren’t Many Homes to Sell.

    February 20, 2023 —
    In the midst of the worst US housing slump in a decade, a wave of finance and tech layoffs and drumbeats of a potential recession, open houses in affluent New York suburbs are packed. Offers come in fast — sometimes for hundreds of thousands over asking. A typical scene played out on a cloudy Sunday last month in Scarsdale, a suburb about 20 miles (32 kilometers) north of Manhattan known for its bucolic setting and high-rated schools. At the tail end of an open house, a dozen people were still wandering in and around a 1926 Tudor-style house listed for about $1.93 million. An older couple took video on their iPhone for their offspring too busy to attend, while a younger man walked around with his infant in a chest carrier. The house was in need of some touch-ups. Somebody whispered that the hardwood floors were scratched, another said that the refrigerator looked warped, and a pair of kitchen cabinet doors was missing. It hardly mattered. Reprinted courtesy of Jennifer Epstein, Bloomberg and Prashant Gopal, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage

    July 06, 2020 —
    Although the appellate court agreed there was property damage caused by an occurrence, the "your work" exclusion barred the insured contractor's claim. King's Cove Marina, LLC v. Lambert Commercial Construction. LLC, 2019 Minn. App. LEXIS 389 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 16, 2019). King's Cover Marina sought to expand and remodel its main building. The marina hired Lambert to perform the remodeling project. Lambert hired Roehl Construction, Inc. as a subcontractor to install new concrete footings on the main level of the building and to provide concrete for the second-level mezzanine floor. After completion, the marina sued Lambert for breach of contract and negligence. The marina alleged that the concrete floors on the first and second levels were not constructed in accordance with industry standards or with project plans and specifications, resulting in excessive movement and cracking of the new concrete floors. Lambert tendered its defense to its insurer, United Fire & Casualty Company. United Fire defended under a reservation of rights and later sued Lambert for declaratory judgment. 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

    New Case Law Update: Mountain Valleys, Chevron Deference and a Long-Awaited Resolution on the Sacketts’ Small Lot

    June 12, 2023 —
    This is a brief roundup of recent federal court environmental and regulatory law decisions from the federal courts over the past few months, including the much anticipated ruling in Sackett, et ux., v, Environmental Protection Agency. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Sackett, et ux., v, Environmental Protection Agency Last year, the Supreme Court issued a significant decision curtailing some of the EPA’s regulatory powers in the Clean Air Act in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. On May 25, 2023, the Court limited EPA’s—and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ authority—under the Clean Water Act. This, too, is a major environmental ruling. The Court held that the EPA could not classify the wetlands located on the Idaho property of Michael and Chantell Sackett as “Waters of the United States” on the basis of the “significant nexus” test devised by Justice Kennedy in his separate opinion in the 2005 case of Rapanos v. United States. Accordingly, the Court unanimously held that their property was not subject to the EPA’s or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting and enforcement power. In 2004, the Sacketts purchased a small lot near Priest Lake in Bonner County, Idaho, on which to build a home. As related by Justice Alito, once they began to fill in their property with dirt and rocks, they were notified by EPA that their backfilling operation violated the Clean Water Act (CWA) because they were affecting protected wetlands. The Sacketts challenged this action, thus beginning a long legal battle with EPA and the federal government. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the federal government’s regulatory authority over these wetlands, holding that the CWA covers “adjacent” wetlands having a significant nexus to traditional navigable waters. The Supreme Court decided that this case was suitable for determining whether the Sackett’s wetlands are “waters of the United States” and thus subject to the permitting and regulatory enforcement powers of the EPA and the Corps of Engineers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Named Insured's Defective Work

    September 02, 2024 —
    The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit determined there was no duty to defend or to indemnify the additional insured for the named insured's defective work. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., et al. v. Walsh Construction Co., 99 F. 4th 1035 (7th Cir. 2024). The City of Chicago contracted with Walsh Construction Company to manage the construction of a canopy and curtain wall system at O'Hare International Airport. Walsh entered into a contract with Carlo Steel Corporation, which in turn subcontracted with LB Steel, LLC to fabricate and install steel columns to support the wall and canopy. LB Steel listed Walsh as an additional insured in its commercial general liability policies. LB Steel's insurers were St. Paul, Travelers, and Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company. Several years into the project, the City discovered cracks in the welds of the steel columns and sued Walsh. Walsh, in turn, sued LB Steel under its subcontract. Walsh also asked LB Steel's insurers to defend it in the City's lawsuit, but they refused to do so. Walsh eventually secured a judgment against LB Steel, but LB Steel declared bankruptcy. Walsh then sued LB Steel's insurers to recover the costs of defending against the City's lawsuit and indemnification for any resulting losses. 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

    CA Supreme Court Set to Rule on Important Occurrence Issue Certified by Ninth Circuit

    March 22, 2018 —
    The California Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments over whether an insurer is required to cover allegations that a builder negligently failed to supervise an employee who sexually assaulted a middle school student while working at the student’s school. The question was originally certified to the California Supreme Court by the Ninth Circuit in 2016, but nothing happened until the court heard arguments on March 6, 2018. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Bennett may be contacted at wsb@sdvlaw.com

    Federal Court of Appeals Signals an End to Project Labor Agreement Requirements Linked to Development Tax Credits

    October 20, 2016 —
    What Action Should Owners, Developers and Contractors Take in Anticipation of Successful Challenges to PLA Requirements? Recently, a federal court in New Jersey issued a decision which very well may invalidate all Project Labor Agreements (“PLA’s”) entered into as a condition to receipt of tax incentives for private development. Tax incentives utilized to promote private development are different, according to the court, than typical public works projects where PLA requirements have generally been held valid. Owners, developers, contractors and governmental entities must assess the consequences of this decision upon contracts already and to be awarded in the future where tax benefits may be linked to a PLA requirement. In 1993, in what has become known as the Boston Harbor Case, the United States Supreme Court held that state and local governmental entities may condition the award of public works contracts on the contractor’s agreement to enter into PLA’s. That decision has been followed nationwide since then to uphold the validity of various state and local law bidding conditions requiring successful bidders to negotiate and enter into project labor agreements as a condition to the award of public works contracts. The rationale is that when the government, like any other private party, is participating in an economic market, it may exercise its discretion in setting terms and conditions it believes best suit its interests in the efficient procurement of goods and services in that market. Therefore, a PLA requirement by a governmental entity engaged in market activity is no more or less valid than a PLA requirement on a purely private project. Reprinted courtesy of Gregory R. Begg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Begg may be contacted at gbegg@pecklaw.com Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    July 09, 2014 —
    Tornadoes, hail and windstorms that pounded the U.S. from the Rocky Mountains to the Tennessee Valley last month will probably cost insurers more than $1 billion, Aon Plc said in a report. Hailstorms and winds greater than 90 miles an hour (145 kilometers) in June caused billions of dollars of economic losses, led by a full week of storms early in the month, the London-based insurance broker said today. More than 300 tornadoes hit the U.S. last month, compared with 125 a year earlier and 111 in June 2012, according to preliminary data from the National Weather Service’s Storm Prediction Center. May, June and July tend to be the worst months for twisters, it said. Severe weather from June 3 to June 9 this year killed three people and led to more than 100,000 claims, Aon said. Later in the month, “hail and winds gusting to hurricane strength tracked eastward,” the broker said in its report. The storm “shattered windows, punctured roofs and downed trees onto homes, structures and vehicles.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kelly Gilblom, Bloomberg
    Ms. Gilblom may be contacted at kgilblom@bloomberg.net