BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington fenestration expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness structural engineerSeattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessSeattle Washington testifying construction 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


    Public Adjuster Cannot Serve As Disinterested Appraiser

    Cooperating With Your Insurance Carrier: Is It a Must?

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    Indemnity: What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You!

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

    Fannie Mae Says Millennials Are Finally Leaving Their Parents' Basements

    Newmeyer Dillion Named 2022 Best Law Firm in Multiple Practice Areas By U.S. News-Best Lawyers

    Providing “Labor” Under the Miller Act

    Industry News: New Partner at Burdman Law Group

    Update: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in West Virginia v. EPA

    Google’s Biggest Moonshot Is Its Search for a Carbon-Free Future

    Liability Coverage for Claims of Publishing Secret Data Does Not Require Access by Others

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    Fourteen Years as a Solo!

    2021 Construction Related Bills to Keep an Eye On [UPDATED]

    California Supreme Court Upholds Precondemnation Procedures

    San Francisco Law Firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Hired New Partner

    FBI Makes Arrest Related to Saipan Casino Construction

    Contractor’s Burden When It Comes to Delay

    California Department of Corrections Gets Hit With the Prison Bid Protest Blues

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

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    Maybe California Actually Does Have Enough Water

    Insurers Subrogating in Arkansas Must Expend Energy to Prove That Their Insureds Have Been Made Whole

    COVID-19 Response: Essential Business Operations: a High-Stakes Question Under Proliferating “Stay at Home” Orders

    Dispute Resolution in Your Construction Contract

    Want a Fair Chance at a Government Contract? Think Again

    New Jersey Court Upholds Registration Requirement for Joint Ventures Bidding on Public Works Contracts

    Massachusetts District Court Holds Contractors Are Not Additional Insureds on Developer’s Builder’s Risk Policy

    Massachusetts Clarifies When the Statute of Repose is Triggered For a Multi-Phase or Multi-Building Project

    Loss Ensuing from Alleged Faulty Workmanship is Covered

    Court Finds That SIR Requirements are Not Incorporated into High Level Excess Policies and That Excess Insurers’ Payment of Defense Costs is Not Conditioned on Actual Liability

    Housing Buoyed by 20-Year High for Vet’s Loans: Mortgages

    West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar Returns to Anaheim May 15th & 16th

    Largest US Dam Removal Stirs Debate Over Coveted West Water

    New Jersey Appellate Decision Reminds Bid Protestors to Take Caution When Determining Where to File an Action

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team on Obtaining a Defense Verdict in Favor of their Subcontractor Client!

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    Professional Liability and Attorney-Client Privilege Bulletin: Intra-Law Firm Communications

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    Chinese Brooklyn-to-Los Angeles Plans Surge: Real Estate

    Don’t Put Yourself In The Position Of Defending Against An Accord And Satisfaction Defense

    The Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Trial to Begin

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments: Maritime Charters and the Specter of a New Permitting Regime

    California Governor Signs SB 496 Amending California’s Anti-Indemnity Statute

    Deadlines. . . They’re Important. Project Owner Risks Losing Claim By Failing to Timely Identify “Doe” Defendant

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

    Retainage: What Contractors Need to Know and Helpful Strategies

    June 04, 2024 —
    Introduction Most, if not all, construction contracts contain a provision for “retainage.” The origin and concept of retainage dates back to the railroad boom that embraced Great Britain in the 1840s. In its simplest terms, retainage is a mechanism by which an owner or general contractor withholds disbursement of funds from the payment of a requisition in order to secure future performance of a contract and/or to pay for repair of defectively performed work. Retainage typically ranges from five to ten percent, with the amount being reduced as the project progresses to substantial and final completion. One of the reasons for withholding retainage is to incentivize a contractor to complete its work in accordance with the contract terms and conditions. While this may be well-intentioned in concept, it all too often leads to abuse that impacts project cash flow and raises tension between the parties. This typically happens on projects that have delay issues, deficient drawings, and/or claims of defective work. When a project has “gone bad,” the withholding of retainage is one of the first things that an owner will latch onto in order to leverage its position against a contractor. In order for a contractor to put itself in the best position possible, the following negotiation techniques and protective measures should be kept in mind. Know Your Applicable Statute Every state except West Virginia has statutes in place that govern the payment of retainage on public projects. On federal projects, the amount of retainage withheld shall not exceed ten percent as set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”). The common thread running through these statutes is the payment of interest as a remedy when the retainage is not timely paid. Historically, most retainage statutes were applicable only to publicly funded projects. This has recently changed with a substantial number of state legislatures recognizing that the payment of retainage on private projects was a serious enough problem to warrant regulation. These include Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Vermont. New York’s retainage laws relating to private projects were enacted only this past November. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gerard J. Onorata, Peckar & Abramson
    Mr. Onorata may be contacted at gonorata@pecklaw.com

    London’s Best Districts Draw Buyers on Italian Triple Dip

    August 27, 2014 —
    Italians were the biggest group of foreigners to buy homes in London’s best districts in the seven months through July as weak domestic growth prompted investment abroad. Italy, which fell into a triple-dip recession in the second quarter, accounted for 6.7 percent of all homes sold in the 13 neighborhoods that Knight Frank LLP defines as prime central London, the broker said in an e-mail today. France was second as euro-area investors accounted for 14.5 percent of purchases, the most in the period since 2011. Russia led the group a year ago, followed by the United Arab Emirates. The European Central Bank’s monetary-policy easing “is driving more euro-zone residents to search for yield abroad,” Goldman Sachs analysts including New York-based chief currency strategist Robin Brooks wrote in a note last week. Yields for homes in prime central London rose in July for the first time since April 2011 as more people opted to rent on concerns that home taxes may rise if the Conservative Party-led government loses next year’s elections, Knight Frank said on Aug. 11. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Neil Callanan, Bloomberg
    Mr. Callanan may be contacted at ncallanan@bloomberg.net

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    May 22, 2023 —
    ASHRAE, the professional group focused on research and standards development for heating, ventilation, air conditioning and air conditioning systems, is seeking comments on the first draft of a standard for pathogen mitigation, it announced May 15. ASHRAE will accept comments on the public review draft, via osr.ashrae.org, through May 26. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Default, Fraud, and VCPA (Oh My!)

    September 12, 2023 —
    I’ve discussed the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) and the interaction between fraud and contract on numerous occasions here at Construction Law Musings. A recent case from the Eastern District of Virginia District Court discusses this interaction (along with that dreaded default) further. In Bhutta v. DRM Construction Corp., the homeowners, the Bhuttas, sued DRM for breach of contract, conversion, fraud, and a violation of the VCPA. These allegations were based upon DRM having taken a $40,000.00 deposit from the Bhuttas and then failing to even begin work. As you may have guessed from the title of this post, DRM did not respond to the Complaint and the Court granted default. The Court then took up the question of whether the Bhuttas had alleged enough on each count for default judgment on those counts. After going through a procedural recitation and finding that DRM was properly served and that the Court had jurisdiction, the Court got to the meat of the matter. The Court held that the Bhuttas properly plead a breach of contract for the obvious reason. The reason was that DRM never performed any work and the Bhuttas were damaged because they both paid the deposit and also had to hire another contractor to complete the work at a higher price. The Court granted default judgment for breach of contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    July 16, 2014 —
    AECOM Technology Corp., a Los Angeles engineering and construction firm, has agreed to pay $4 billion to acquire URS Corp., their San Francisco competitor. According to the Sacramento Bee, “The combined company will employ about 95,000 people in 150 countries.” AECOM is currently building the World Trade Center in New York, and previous projects include the Los Angeles Police Department headquarters, and renovations to the Port of Los Angeles and the Bradley international terminal at the Los Angeles International Airport, the Sacramento Bee reported. Furthermore, “URS has worked on the Garden Grove (22) Freeway reconstruction, the UCLA Ronald Reagan Medical Center, the Port of Long Beach, the Gold Line Eastside Extension in Los Angeles and the Disneyland resort expansion.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    August 11, 2011 —

    The Alaska Supreme Court found that in the case of Khalsa v. Chose, Ms. Khalsa? failure to cooperate with the courts has obligated them to dismiss her claims against Mr. Chose. Ms. Khalsa bought a home kit from Mandala Custom Homes of Nelson, British Columbia, Canada. Mr. Chose, one of the owners of Mandala was paid by Ms. Khalsa to supervise assembly in Fairbanks. After construction, the roof developed leaks. Ms. Khalsa stated that when climbing a ladder to inspect a skylight leak, she fell and injured herself.

    During the subsequent suit, Khalsa proved uncooperative. She skipped a pretrial conference. She attended a hearing that set discovery deadlines but then did not comply with discovery, including her failure to provide medical records documenting her injuries. She eventually said that she would only be able to travel from Arizona to Alaska if the defendants paid for her and her caretaker?s expenses.

    When finally deposed, Khalsa terminated the deposition after five minutes, alleging the deposition was “intentionally designed to cause [her] to endure further emotional distress, due to the psychological trauma . . . that was caused or contributed to by the defendants.”

    Eventually, the lower court sanctioned her twice. In July, 2008, the court concluded that her failure to provide medical records required dismissal of her injury lawsuit. In October of that year, the court dismissed all remaining claims due to her “pattern of excuses and long delays in providing information for discovery culminating in her refusal to participate in her deposition by the defendants.” Further, Khalsa has argued that the trial court displayed “prejudice and bias toward the pro se plaintiff.”

    The Alaska Supreme Court rejected all of Ms. Khalsa?s claims, dismissing her case. They did, however, note that she has thirty days to file an appeal.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    12 Newmeyer Dillion Attorneys Named to 2022 U.S. News Best Lawyers in Multiple Practice Areas

    August 23, 2021 —
    Prominent business and real estate law firm Newmeyer Dillion is pleased to announce that twelve of the firm's attorneys were recently selected for inclusion and will be recognized in their respective areas in The Best Lawyers in America© 2022. Additionally, Greg Dillion has been selected to Best Lawyers 2022 Lawyer of the Year list in Construction Law. The twelve 2022 Best Lawyers are: Jason Moberly Caruso, Michael S. Cucchissi, Jeffrey M. Dennis, Greg L. Dillion, Joseph A. Ferrentino, Jon J. Janecek, Michael B. McClellan, Thomas F. Newmeyer, John A. O'Hara, Thomas H. Reilly, Bonnie T. Roadarmel and Jane M. Samson Best Lawyers is the oldest peer-review publication for the legal profession. Attorneys are chosen through intensive peer-review surveys in which leading lawyers evaluate their professional peers. Best Lawyers listings are published in almost 70 countries worldwide and are recognized for their reliable and unbiased selections. About Newmeyer Dillion For over 35 years, Newmeyer Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results that achieve client objectives in diverse industries. With over 60 attorneys working as a cohesive team to represent clients in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, environmental/land use, privacy & data security and insurance law, Newmeyer Dillion delivers holistic and integrated legal services tailored to propel each client's operations, growth, and profits. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California and Nevada, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949.854.7000 or visit www.newmeyerdillion.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    You Are Not A “Liar” Simply Because You Amend Your Complaint

    March 14, 2022 —
    In litigation, it is common for a plaintiff to amend their complaint. They may amend to add additional parties. To add new claims. To change the factual allegations. Or, to change the theme of their case. Most of the time, complaints are not verified by the plaintiff. Instead, complaints are drafted and signed by the plaintiff’s counsel. A question becomes: how prior reiterations of a complaint can be used against the plaintiff to show they are a bunch of “liars” by making amendments to their complaint. Sounds prejudicial to the plaintiff, right? Particularly if there is a jury. The reality is that amending complaints for various reasons is routine. Doing so does NOT make the plaintiff a liar and is not a vehicle that a defendant should use to create this inference. A defendant that tries to do so simply wants to detract from the substantive facts and issues. 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