BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington multi family design expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington construction expert witness consultantSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert testimony
    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 Contract Code Section 1104 Does Not Apply to Claims of Implied Breach of Warranty of Correctness of Plans and Specifications

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    NY State Appellate Court Holds That Pollution Exclusions Bar Duty to Defend Under Liability Policies for Claims Alleging Exposure to PFAS

    No Signature, No Problem: Texas Court Holds Contractual Subrogation Waiver Still Enforceable

    San Francisco Office Secures Defense Verdict in Legal Malpractice Action

    The Almost-Collapse of a Sarasota, Florida Condo Building

    New York’s 2022 Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act: Significant Amendments to the C.P.L.R.

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Protecting Expert Opinions: Lessons Regarding Attorney-Client Privilege and Expert Retention in Construction Litigation

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    California Appellate Court Holds “Minimal Causal Connection” Satisfies Causation Requirement in All Risk Policies

    The Construction Project is Late—Allocation of Delay

    Chambers USA 2020 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    U.S. Homeownership Rate Falls to Lowest Since Early 1995

    Architects Should Not Make Initial Decisions on Construction Disputes

    Digitalizing Cross-Laminated Timber Construction

    Bad Faith Jury Verdict Upheld After Insurer's Failure to Settle Within Policy Limits

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    ‘Revamp the Camps’ Cabins Displayed at the CA State Fair

    KF-103 v. American Family Mutual Insurance: An Exception to the Four Corners Rule

    Ruling Dealing with Constructive Changes, Constructive Suspension, and the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Build, Baby, Build. But Not Like This, Britain.

    Update Coverage for Construction Defect Claims in Colorado

    Insurer Could Not Rely on Extrinsic Evidence to Circumvent Its Duty to Defend

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Smart Cities Offer New Ideas for Connectivity

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    California Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Regulate Replacement Cost Estimates

    Construction Law- Where Pragmatism and Law Collide

    Microsoft Said to Weigh Multibillion-Dollar Headquarters Revamp

    AAA Revises Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures

    Arezoo Jamshidi Selected to the 2023 San Diego Super Lawyers List

    Violation of Prompt Payment Statutes is Not a Breach of Contract. But That’s Not the Most Interesting Part

    Cumulative Impact Claims and Definition by Certain Boards

    Scientists found a way to make Cement Greener

    Connecticut Supreme Court Finds Duty to Defend When Case Law is Uncertain

    Chambers USA 2019 Ranks White and Williams as a Leading Law Firm

    Virginia General Assembly Helps Construction Contractors

    Let it Shine: California Mandates Rooftop Solar for New Residential Construction

    Are You Taking Full Advantage of Available Reimbursements for Assisting Injured Workers?

    Faulty Workmanship an Occurrence in Iowa – as Long as Other Property Damage is Involved

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: LISA D. LOVE

    Cincinnati Goes Green

    Traub Lieberman Partner Jonathan Harwood Obtains Summary Judgment Determining Insurer Has No Duty to Defend or Indemnify

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    South Caroline Holds Actual Cash Value Can Include Depreciation of Labor Costs
    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

    Three Payne & Fears Attorneys Named 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars

    June 17, 2024 —
    We congratulate our Payne & Fears attorneys named 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers Rising Stars in the following practice areas: Employment & Labor Blake A. Dillion Business Litigation Leilani L. Jones Employment Litigation: Defense Tyler B. Runge Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Payne & Fears LLP

    Trucks looking for Defects Create Social Media Frenzy

    July 23, 2014 —
    According to Willits News, slow-moving trucks with cameras attached rolled through Fort Briggs, attracting attention from homeowners in the community. People began mentioning the trucks on social media sites, with questions regarding what the cameras on the trucks were recording. Osmose Utilities General Manager, Jason Milligan, told Willits News that the trucks were “surveying overhead power poles and lines for PG&E.” "We're not looking for anything but what's overhead," Mulligan said, according to Willits News. "We find defects or issues with construction ... 20 or 30 feet off the ground, which are safety issues. We don't scan anything down towards people's homes." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Turner Construction Selected for Anaheim Convention Center Expansion Project

    May 21, 2014 —
    The Anaheim, California city council selected Turner Construction Company “to manage a $180 million expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center, a venue that hosted 238 tradeshows, conventions, meetings and consumer events in 2013,” according to Construction Digital. “Turner’s Southern California office calls Anaheim home, and we are pleased to be working on such a great project in our own backyard,” Kevin Dow, Vice President and General Manager of Turner’s Southern California office told Construction Digital. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nancy Conrad Recognized in Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List

    July 31, 2024 —
    Nancy Conrad, Chair of the Higher Education Group, Managing Partner of the Lehigh Valley Office and the President of the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA), has been named to the Lehigh Valley Business 2024 Power in Law List, for her work as a leader in the legal field. This year’s honorees were asked to relate inspiration that pushed the pursuit of their career. One of her inspirations, as explained by Nancy in the article, was the opportunity to instruct and impact students while teaching during the day and pursuing a legal career in the evening at Temple Law which cemented a “commitment to excellence in the practice of law and service to the community.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    How Does Your Construction Contract Treat Float

    November 08, 2017 —
    Although there are different types of construction schedule float and more technical definitions, the definition that makes sense to me is that float is the amount of time a particular activity can be delayed without that activity delaying the project’s completion date (substantial completion date). In looking at a construction schedule, this determination is made from looking at the difference between the early start date for an activity and the late start date for that activity or the difference between the early finish date for that activity and the late finish date for that activity in your CPM schedule (which should be the same amount of time). This is often referred to as “total float” and is the float that I usually focus on since it may pertain to a delay to the substantial completion date of the project and can trigger either the assessment of liquidated damages and/or the contractor’s extended general conditions, whatever the case may be. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

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

    July 15, 2019 —
    A general release of “unknown” claims through the effective date of the release does NOT bar “unaccrued” claims. This is especially important when it comes to fraud claims where the facts giving rise to the fraud may have occurred prior to the effective date in the release, but a party did not learn of the fraud until well after the effective date in the release. A recent opinion maintained that a general release that bars unknown claims does NOT mean a fraud claim will be barred since the last element to prove a fraud had not occurred, and thus, the fraud claim had not accrued until after the effective date in the release. See Falsetto v. Liss, Fla. L. Weekly D1340D (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“The 2014 [Settlement] Agreement’s plain language released the parties only from “known or unknown” claims, not future or unaccrued claims. Because there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the fraud claim had accrued — that is, whether Falsetto [party to Settlement Agreement] knew or through the exercise of due diligence should have known about the alleged fraud at the time the 2014 Agreement was executed — the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on those fraud claims.”). 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

    Seeking the Urban Lifestyle in the Suburbs

    March 05, 2015 —
    As the ‘burbs become more urbanized, the definition of city is changing. Builder Magazine reported that while builders have responded to buyers who wanted an urban lifestyle, “what nearly all of them have learned in the process is that ‘city’ doesn’t mean what it used to. Neither does ‘suburb.’ In fact, nearly every builder that added a post-recession ‘urban’ division has found that home buyers in search of an urban lifestyle aren’t married to living downtown. For many, it seems it’s not ‘the city’ they want at all—it’s the lifestyle.” Leigh Gallagher, assistant managing editor of Fortune and author of The End of the Suburbs: Where the American Dream is Moving, told Builder, “People don’t necessarily want to live in Manhattan. They want a little bit of Manhattan sprinkled right near them.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toxic Drywall Not Covered Under Homeowner’s Policy

    March 28, 2012 —

    The Duphuys of Baton Rouge Louisiana found themselves needing to argue both sides of an issue, according to the judge in Duphuy v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company. The Duphuys alleged that the drywall in their home “emits odorous gases that cause damage to air-condition and refrigerator coils, copper tubing, electrical wiring, computer wiring, and other household items.” Additionally, they reported damage to “their home’s insulation, trimwork, floors, cabinets, carpets, and other items” which they maintained were “covered under the ‘ensuing loss’ portion of their policy.”

    Their insurer declined coverage, stating that the damages were not a “direct, physical loss,” and even if they were “four different exclusions independently exclude coverage, even if such loss occurred.” The policy excludes defective building materials, latent defects, pollutants, and corrosion damage. The court noted that “ambiguities in policy exclusions are construed to afford coverage to the insured.”

    The court did determine that the Duphuys were not in “a situation where the plaintiffs caused the risk for which they now seek coverage.” The judge cited an earlier case, In re Chinese Drywall, “a case with substantially similar facts and construing the same policy” and in that case, “property damage” was determined to “include the loss of use of tangible property.” The court’s conclusion was that the Duphuys “suffered a direct, physical loss triggering coverage under their policy.”

    Unfortunately for the Duphuys, at this point the judge noted that while they had a “direct, physical loss,” the exclusions put them “in the tough predicament of claiming the drywall is neither defective nor its off-gassing corrosive or a pollutant, but nonetheless damage-causing.”

    In the earlier Chinese Drywall case, the judge found that “faulty and defective materials” “constitutes a physical thing tainted by imperfection or impairment.” The case “found the drywall served its intended purpose as a room divider and insulator but nonetheless qualified under the exclusion, analogizing the drywall to building components containing asbestos that courts have previously determined fit under the same exclusion.” In the current case, the judge concluded that the drywall was “outside the realm of coverage under the policy.”

    The court also found that it had to apply the corrosion exclusion, noting that the plaintiffs tried to evade this by stating, “simplistically and somewhat disingenuously, that the damage is not caused by corrosion but by the drywall itself.” The plaintiffs are, however, parties to another Chinese drywall case, Payton v. Knauf Gips KG, in which “they directly alleged that ‘sulfides and other noxious gases, such as those emitted from [Chinese] drywall, cause corrosion and damage to personal property.’” As the court pointed out, the Duphuys could not claim in one case that the corrosion was caused by gases emitted by the drywall and in another claim it was the drywall itself. “They hope their more ambiguous allegations will be resolved in their favor and unlock the doors to discovery.”

    The court quickly noted that “the remaining damage allegations are too vague and conclusory to construe” and permitted “exploration of the latent defect and pollution exclusions.”

    The judge concluded that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient facts to establish coverage under the ensuing loss provision, stating that the “plaintiffs must allege, at the very least, how the drywall causes damage to the trimwork, carpet, etc., not simply that it does so.” Given the court’s determinations in the case, the plaintiffs’ motion was dismissed.

    Read the court’s decision…

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