BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington consulting engineersSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington construction project management 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


    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (07/13/22)

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    Claim Against Broker Survives Motion to Dismiss

    The Biggest Trials Coming to Courts Around the World in 2021

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    Part II: Key Provisions of School Facility Construction & Design Contracts

    Colorado Governor Polis’s Executive Order D 2020 101: Keeping Up with Colorado’s Shifting Eviction Landscape during COVID-19

    Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reverse Bad Faith

    Fire Raging North of Los Angeles Is Getting Fuel From Dry Winds

    President Trump Nullifies “Volks Rule” Regarding Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Recordkeeping Requirements

    Architect Blamed for Crumbling Public School Playground

    Construction Defect Specialist Joins Kansas City Firm

    The Riskiest Housing Markets in the U.S.

    Generally, What Constitutes A Trade Secret Is A Question of Fact

    Everyone's Moving to Seattle, and It's Stressing Out Sushi Lovers

    BHA Has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports NCHV and Final Salute at 2017 WCC Seminar

    Collaborating or Competing with Construction Tech Startups

    California Supreme Court Confirms the Right to Repair Act as the Exclusive Remedy for Seeking Relief for Defects in New Residential Construction

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

    Court of Appeals Discusses the Difference Between “Claims-Made” and “Occurrence-Based” Insurance Policies

    Waiving Consequential Damages—What Could Go Wrong?

    Show Me the Money: The Good Faith Dispute Exception to Prompt Payment Penalties

    Will COVID-19 Permanently Shift the Balance between Work from Home and the Workplace?

    OSHA Reinforces COVID Guidelines for the Workplace

    Giant Floating Solar Flowers Offer Hope for Coal-Addicted Korea

    Construction Defect Claim not Barred by Prior Arbitration

    Pollution Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Building Permits Up in USA Is a Good Sign

    Product Liability Alert: “Sophisticated User” Defense Not Available by Showing Existence of a “Sophisticated Intermediary”

    Gaps in Insurance Created by Complex Risks

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Construction Lien Needs to Be Recorded Within 90 Days from Lienor’s Final Furnishing

    Carbon Sequestration Can Combat Global Warming, Sometimes in Unexpected Ways

    South Dakota Supreme Court Holds That Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an “Occurrence”

    City Sues over Leaking Sewer System

    The First UK Hospital Being Built Using AI Technology

    Building Amid the COVID Challenge

    Certificate of Merit to Sue Architects or Engineers Bill Proposed

    Brief Overview of Rights of Unlicensed Contractors in California

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Construction defect firm Angius & Terry moves office to Roseville

    Client Alert: Court Settles Conflict between CCP and Rules of Court Regarding Demurrer Deadline Following Amended Complaint

    Seller Faces Federal Charges for Lying on Real Estate Disclosure Forms

    No Duty to Indemnify When Discovery Shows Faulty Workmanship Damages Insured’s Own Work

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    The Future of Construction Work with Mark Ehrlich

    Red Wings Owner, Needing Hockey-Arena Neighborhood, Builds One

    Court Exclaims “Enough!” To Homeowner Who Kept Raising Wrongful Foreclosure Claims

    Homeowner’s Policy Excludes Coverage for Loss Caused by Chinese Drywall

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff
    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

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    September 28, 2020 —
    A D.C. Superior Court rejected a business interruption claim due to closures related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rose's 1, LLC v. Erie Ins. Exchange, Civil Case No 2020 CA 002424 B (Order dated Aug. 8, 2020). The decision is here. Plaintiffs owned a number of restaurants in the District of Coiumbia. Plaintiffs had commercial property coverage in a policy issued by Erie. The policy provided coverage for loss of income sustained due to interruption of business resulting directly from "loss or damage" to the insured property. DC Mayor Bowser issued a series of orders in March 2020 which closed all non-essential businesses, including plaintiffs' restaurants. Plaintiffs filed claims with Erie. When coverage was denied, plaintiffs filed suit. Both sides moved for summary judgment. The dispute centered on whether the closure of the restaurants due to the mayor's orders constituted a "direct physical loss" under the policy. Plaintiffs argued that the loss of use of the restaurants was "direct" because the closures were the direct result of the mayor's orders without intervening action. The court reasoned, however, that the orders were governmental edicts that commanded individuals and businesses to take certain actions. Standing alone and absent intervening actions by individuals and businesses, the orders did not effect any direct changes to the properties. 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

    For Breach of Contract Claim, There Needs to be a Breach of a Contractual Duty

    November 15, 2022 —
    Remember this law (and I mean: remember this law!): “An essential element of a claim for breach of contract is the existence of a material breach of a contractual duty.” JD Development I, LLC v. ICS Contractors, LLC, 2022 WL 4587083, *3 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (citation and quotation omitted). This law is important because how can another party breach of a contract if there is no contractual duty you claim they breached? This question, and, of course, the answer, should not be overlooked from a strategic standpoint because it may dictate what claims you assert, how you assert those claims, and how you present your case from a theme and evidentiary standpoint. JD Development provides an example of why this law is important and how this can play out. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

    October 01, 2013 —
    The new PATH station at the World Trade Center site in New York is six years behind schedule and its cost has doubled to $4 billion dollars. But maybe New Yorkers shouldn’t be surprised. The New York Times reports that the Port Authority, which operates the PATH trains between New York and New Jersey, hired Santiago Calatrava, an architect whose work has frequently lead to cost overruns and claims of defects. The problems in lower Manhattan are not all Mr. Calatrava’s fault. Auditors described the Port Authority as “a challenged and dysfunctional organization.” (A separate report in the New York Times notes that a former PATH executive may have walked away with the rights to the words “World Trade Center” for $10. The company he subsequently founded, The World Trade Center Association, charges millions for the use of the name.) One problem with Mr. Calatrava’s design for the station is that he insisted that all the mechanical elements of the station be located in other buildings. Further, the Port Authority might want to examine those plans carefully. In the design for a museum in Valencia, Spain, Mr. Calatrava forgot to provide for handicap access or fire escapes. That project, according to the Times tripled in cost as it was built. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    D.R. Horton Profit Beats Estimates as Home Sales Jumped

    January 28, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- D.R. Horton Inc., the largest U.S. homebuilder by revenue, reported fiscal first-quarter earnings that beat estimates as sales jumped. The shares rose the most since October. Net income was $142.5 million, or 39 cents a share, for the three months ended Dec. 31, compared with $123.2 million, or 36 cents, a year earlier, the Fort Worth, Texas-based company said Monday in a statement. The average of 14 analyst estimates was 35 cents a share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Results for the quarter included $6 million in inventory and land option charges, according to the statement. Reprinted courtesy of Bloomberg reporters Prashant Gopal and John Gittelsohn Mr. Gittlesohn may be contacted at johngitt@bloomberg.net; Mr. Gopal may be contacted at pgopal2@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    September 15, 2016 —
    The second a series of stockholder meetings will be held on August 30, 2016 in Sacramento, California to consider proposed amendments to the state building code for the installation of recycled water systems for newly constructed single-family, multifamily, commercial and public buildings. 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

    Massachusetts High Court: Attorney's Fee Award Under Consumer Protection Act Not Covered by General Liability Insurance Policy

    September 19, 2022 —
    In the case of Vermont Mutual Insurance Co. v. Poirier, 189 N.E.3d 306 (Mass. 2022), Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court concluded that an award of attorney's fees pursuant to Chapter 93A (Massachusetts’ Consumer Protection Act) is not covered under an insured’s general liability insurance policy. Applying Massachusetts law, the Court found that a statutory award of attorney’s fees stemming from a bodily injury claim is not reasonably considered “damages because of bodily injury” or “costs taxed against the insured” so as to trigger general liability coverage. Facts of the Case A Servpro company (owned by Mr. and Mrs. Poirier) was hired to clean up a basement after a sewage spill. The owners of the home were injured by fumes from chemicals used in the cleanup and accordingly brought suit against the Poiriers and their Servpro business. In the lawsuit, the homeowners alleged negligence, breach of contract, and also a Chapter 93A claim, asserting breach of warranty of merchantability and warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Prior to trial, the plaintiffs waived the negligence and breach of contract claims and sought a bench trial on the Chapter 93A claims alone. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and David G. Jordan, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Vita may be contacted at JVita@sdvlaw.com Mr. Jordan may be contacted at DJordan@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Flushing Away Liability: What the Aqua Engineering Case Means for Contractors and Subcontractors

    October 21, 2024 —
    The recent Town of Mancos v. Aqua Engineering case is an insightful example of how well written contracts and timely legal action can make all the difference in resolving disputes between municipalities, general contractors, and subcontractors. The ruling favored Aqua Engineering; a subcontractor that played a role in a wastewater treatment facility project gone wrong. The court’s decision highlighted key legal principles, including the economic loss rule and the importance of well-structured contracts in construction disputes. Whether you are a subcontractor looking to avoid undue liability or a general contractor seeking to ensure subcontractors shoulder their fair portion of responsibility, this case offers valuable lessons for all parties involved in construction projects. The Background: A Wastewater Project with Issues In 2008, the Town of Mancos, Colorado, hired Souder, Miller & Associates (“SMA”) to design a new wastewater treatment facility. SMA subcontracted Aqua Engineering to help implement a specific wastewater treatment system known as the Multi-Stage Activated Biological Process (“MSABP”). However, after construction, the facility never worked as expected. For years, the Town faced ongoing issues, and despite Aqua’s involvement in attempts to fix the problems, the facility remained dysfunctional. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC

    Massachusetts Judge Holds That Insurer Breached Its Duty To Defend Lawsuit After Chemical Spill

    October 16, 2018 —
    A District Court Judge for the District of Massachusetts recently ruled that Ace Property and Casualty Insurance Co. breached its duty to defend its insured in a lawsuit brought by Plaistow Project, LLC, after a family owned laundromat leaked chemicals onto Plaistow Project’s property. Plaistow Project, LLC v. ACE Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., No. 16-CV-11385-IT, 2018 WL 4357480, (D. Mass. Sept. 13, 2018). Plaistow Project sued State Line Laundry Services in state court, and ACE denied coverage under the pollution exclusion in State Line Laundry’s insurance policy. Plaistow Project then settled with State Line Laundry. Under the settlement terms, Plaistow Project was assigned State Line Laundry’s rights against ACE. In the subsequent coverage litigation, Plaistow Project alleged that ACE had breached its duty to defend State Line Laundry under its insurance policy. ACE argued that (1) the burden was on the policyholder to demonstrate that the policy’s “sudden and accidental” exception applied to the policy’s pollution exclusion; and (2) the policyholder could not show the “sudden and accidental” exception applied based on the complaint. Reprinted courtesy of Lawrence J. Bracken, II, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Alexander D. Russo, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Bracken, may be contacted at lbracken@HuntonAK.com Mr. Russo may be contacted at arusso@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of