BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessSeattle Washington slope failure expert witnessSeattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington stucco 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


    Subcontractors Found Liable to Reimburse Insurer Defense Costs in Equitable Subrogation Action

    Personal Guarantor Cannot Escape a Personal Guarantee By…

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/20/22

    1st District Joins 2nd District Court of Appeals and Holds that One-Year SOL Applies to Disgorgement Claims

    Notice and Claims Provisions In Contracts Matter…A Lot

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Nevada Governor Signs Construction Defect Reform Bill

    Performance Bonds: Follow the Letter of the Bond and Keep The Surety Informed

    Insurer’s Attempt to Shift Cost of Defense to Another Insurer Found Void as to Public Policy

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort

    Macron Visits Notre Dame 2 Years After Devastating Fire

    Decline in Home Construction Brings Down Homebuilder Stocks

    Construction Litigation Group Listed in U.S. News Top Tier

    Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Owner’s Claims Based on Contractual One-Year Claims Limitations Period

    Project-Specific Policies and Products-Completed Operations Hazard Extensions

    ETF Bulls Bet Spring Will Thaw the U.S. Housing Market

    Recent Third Circuit OSHA Decision Sounds Alarm for Employers and Their Officers

    The Contributors to This Blog Are Pleased to Announce That….

    Building Inspector Jailed for Taking Bribes

    The Pandemic of Litigation Sure to Follow the Coronavirus

    State Farm to Build Multi-Use Complex in Dallas Area

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds that Subrogation Waiver Does Not Violate Statute Prohibiting Limitation on Tort Liability in Construction Contracts

    Scott Saylin Expands Employment Litigation and Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law

    A Look Back at the Ollies

    Bert Hummel Appointed to Chief Justice’s Commission on Professionalism

    Lauren Motola-Davis Honored By Providence Business News as a 2021 Leader & Achiever

    Thousands of London Residents Evacuated due to Fire Hazards

    Keeping KeyArena's Landmark Lid Overhead at Climate Pledge Arena Redevelopment Is A 22,000-Ton Balancing Act

    Hawaii State Senate Requires CGL Carriers to Submit Premium Information To State Legislature

    BWB&O Partner Tyler Offenhauser and Associate Lizbeth Lopez Won Their Motion for Summary Judgment Based on the Privette Doctrine

    What I Learned at My First NAWIC National Conference

    California Court Confirms Broad Coverage Under “Ongoing Operations” Endorsements

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    Register and Watch Partner John Toohey Present on the CLM Webinar Series!

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    Workarounds for Workers' Comp Immunity: How to Obtain Additional Insured Coverage when the Named Insured is Immune from Suit

    The Uncertain Future of the IECC

    A Place to Study Eternity: Building the Giant Magellan Telescope

    Discussing Parametric Design with Shajay Bhooshan of Zaha Hadid Architects

    Best U.S. Home Sales Since 2007 Show Momentum in Housing Market

    Nuclear Energy Gets a Much-Needed Boost

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    HP Unveils Cheaper, 3-D Printing System to Spur Sales

    In All Fairness: Illinois Appellate Court Finds That Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Was Unconscionable and Unenforceable

    Trump Abandons Plan for Council on Infrastructure

    Key Legal Issues to Consider Before and After Natural Disasters

    Contractor Removed from Site for Lack of Insurance

    Trump Administration Issues Proposed 'Waters of the U.S.' Rule

    Montrose III: Appeals Court Rejects “Elective Vertical Stacking,” but Declines to Find “Universal Horizontal Exhaustion” Absent Proof of Policy Wordings
    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

    Montrose Language Interpreted: How Many Policies Are Implicated By A Construction Defect That Later Causes a Flood?

    March 17, 2011 —

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana recently addressed the “Montrose” language added to the CGL ISO form in 2001 in the context of a construction defect claim where a fractured storm drain caused significant flooding a year after the drain was damaged. The insuring agreement requires that “bodily injury” or “property damage” be caused by an “occurrence” and that the “bodily injury” or “property damage” occur during the policy period. The Montrose language adds that the insurance applies only if, prior to the policy period, no insured knew that the “bodily injury” or “property damage” had occurred in whole or in part. Significantly, it also states that any “bodily injury“ or “property damage” which occurs during the policy period and was not, prior to the policy period known to have occurred, includes a continuation, change or resumption of that “bodily injury” or “property damage” after the end of the policy period.

    In Grange Mutual Cas. Co. v. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co., No. 29D04-0706-PL-1112 (Ct. App. IN March 15, 2011), http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03151109ehf.pdf, Sullivan was the General Contractor for a school construction project. Its subcontractor, McCurdy, installed the storm drain pipes. One of the storm pipes was fractured in 2005 while McCurdy was doing its installation work. More than a year later, the school experienced significant water damage due to flooding. It was later discovered that the flooding was due to the fractured storm drain. Sullivan’s insurer paid $146,403 for the water damage. That insurer brought a subrogation claim against McCurdy and its two insurers: West Bend and Grange. West Bend had issued CGL coverage to McCurdy while the construction was ongoing , including the date in which the storm pipe was fractured. Grange issued CGL coverage to McCurdy at the time of the flooding. Those two carriers jointly settled the subrogation claim and then litigated which insurer actually owed coverage for the loss. Significantly, the loss that was paid included only damages from the flooding, not any damages for the cost of repairing the pipe.

    Read the full story...

    Reprinted courtesy of Shaun McParland Baldwin of Tressler LLP. Ms Baldwin can be contacted at sbaldwin@tresslerllp.com

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

    New York High Court: “Issued or Delivered” Includes Policies Insuring Risks in New York

    December 20, 2017 —
    On November 20th, the New York Court of Appeals reinstated a case seeking more than six million dollars in damages against the insurers for DHL Worldwide Express Inc. (“DHL”), originating from a fatal head-on car crash between Claudia Carlson and a truck owned by MVP Delivery and Logistics Inc. (“MVP”), a DHL contractor. The truck, which bore DHL’s logo, was owned by MVP and driven by an MVP employee. The MVP employee was running an errand unrelated to his job at the time of the accident. Mrs. Carlson’s husband sued the employee, DHL, and MVP. The jury award of $20 million was reduced to $7.3 million by the Appellate Division. MVP’s insurer paid Mr. Carlson just over $1 million, and the employee assigned his rights to any other insurance coverage to Mr. Carlson Mr. Carlson sued DHL and its insurers, seeking the balance of the outstanding judgment pursuant to New York Insurance Law § 3420. The defendants successfully moved to dismiss Mr. Carlson’s claims, which dismissal was affirmed by the Appellate Division on the basis that § 3420 did not apply since the policies in question were not “issued or delivered” in New York; they had been issued in New Jersey and delivered in Washington and Florida. The Court of Appeals was subsequently presented with two questions: (1) whether the DHL policies fell within the purview of Insurance Law § 3420 as policies “issued or delivered” in New York; and (2) whether MVP was an “insured” pursuant to the “hired auto” provisions of DHL’s policies. Reprinted courtesy of Bethany Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Samantha Martino, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com Ms. Martino may be contacted at smm@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    August 04, 2015 —
    Recently, my friend and fellow construction attorney/consultant, Chris Cheatham (@chrischeatham) posted the news that USGBC will be more stringent on the de-certification front. This statement relates to the continued energy performance of LEED certified buildings and increases the likelihood that energy performance (as opposed to mere reporting) could lead to de-certification. I have discussed on several occasions the potential legal risks relating to green building. One of the big potential sources for such litigation (or “leedigation” as coined by Mr. Cheatham) is the possible de-certification of a previously certified building. With this latest statement by USGBC the specter of such de-certification seems even stronger. Couple this potential with the fact that anyone can challenge the certification of a building at any time and contractors, subcontractors and other construction professionals face potential liability for the performance of a building in ways well beyond their control. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christopher G. Hill, Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    EPA Announces Decision to Retain Current Position on RCRA Regulation of Oil and Gas Production Wastes

    June 03, 2019 —
    After much study, EPA has decided against changing its current RCRA Subtitle D rules affecting the state regulation of oil and gas exploration & production waste. Since 1988, EPA has determined that most such wastes should be regulated as only non-hazardous wastes subject to RCRA Subtitle D, and not the more onerous hazardous waste provisions of RCRA Subtitle C. (See the Regulatory Determination of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Exploration, Development and Production Wastes, 53 FR 25,446 (July 6,1988).) As a result, under the Subtitle D rules, the primary regulators of such waste are state regulatory agencies, which follow the state plan non-hazardous waste guidelines developed by EPA. This regulatory disposition has proven to be fairly controversial, and it was recently challenged in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: Environmental Integrity Project, et al. v. McCarthy. To settle this lawsuit, EPA and the plaintiffs entered into a consent decree by which EPA was to make certain determinations about the future of the program after conducting an appropriate study. That study, Management of Exploration, Development and Production Wastes: Factors Informing a Decision on the Need for Regulatory Action, has been completed, and it concludes, after a fairly comprehensive review of these state regulatory programs, that “revisions to the federal regulations for the management of E&P wastes under Subtitle D of RCRA (40 CFR Part 257) are not necessary at this time.” In a statement released on April 23, 2019, EPA accepted these findings and promised that it would continue to work with states and other stakeholders to identify areas for improvement and to address emerging issues to ensure that exploration, development and production wastes “continue to be managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment.” 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

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    October 02, 2015 —
    A friendly reminder from the Contractors State License Board . . . CSLB Urges Public Works Contractors to Renew Dept. of Industrial Relations Registration before October 1 to Avoid Hefty Penalty SACRAMENTO — A mandatory renewal deadline is approaching for licensees who work on public works projects. Contractors whose registration with the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) expired June 30, 2015, and have ongoing public works projects or plan to bid on new ones, must pay the $300 renewal fee before October 1, 2015, or face an additional $2,000 late penalty after that date. As a result of Senate Bill (SB) 854, all contractors have been required since April 1, 2015, to register with DIR to be awarded a public works contract, even if the project did not go out to bid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    No Duty to Defend Under Pollution Policy

    February 11, 2014 —
    The court found there was no duty to defend or indemnify under a pollution policy for claims arising from a building fire. URS Corp. v. Zurich Am Ins. Co., 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 222 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 16, 2014). Two firemen were killed while fighting a fire at the Deutsch Bank building in New York City. The owner of the building, URS, was sued by the estates of the two deceased firemen and other firemen who were injured by the fire. URS was an additional insured under a contractors pollution liability policy issued by Hudson Specialty Insurance Company. The policy promised to pay for damages to the insured "if the damages result from a pollution condition." "Pollution condition" was defined as "the discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic chemicals, [etc.]" The policy explicitly noted that it did not provide commercial general liability coverage. Hudson denied coverage and URS sued. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams. Unlicensed Contractor Takes the Cake

    August 31, 2020 —
    Before the Kardashians, before Empire, before Crazy Rich Asians there was Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous with Robin Leach. The next case, Moore v. Teed, Case No. A153523 (April 24, 2020), 1st District Court of Appeals, is about the unfulfilled wishes and dashed dreams of the $13 million dollar “fixer upper.” Moore v. Teed The $13 Million Dollar “Fixer Upper” Justin Moore just wanted to buy a house in San Francisco. But he couldn’t afford one in the neighborhoods he preferred. But in 2011, luck struck, when Moore met Richard Teed, a real estate agent with “over 25 years of experience as a building contractor,” “an extensive background in historic restorations” and a “deep understanding of quality construction.” Teed told Moore that he could locate a “lower-priced fixer-upper in a choice neighborhood and then renovate it.” Moore was sold. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    NYPD Investigating Two White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge

    July 23, 2014 —
    The New York City Police Department is trying to figure out who replaced the American flags that fly atop the Brooklyn Bridge with white banners. The replacement flags were discovered this morning on the towers at opposite ends of the bridge, where the Stars and Stripes are normally displayed, and were removed, police said. The NYPD’s Counterterrorism Bureau and Emergency Service Unit are probing the incident and reviewing surveillance video to determine who replaced the flags and when the act took place, police said. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chris Dolmetsch, Bloomberg
    Mr. Dolmetsch may be contacted at cdolmetsch@bloomberg.net