BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington civil engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington consulting architect expert witnessSeattle Washington building code 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


    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2022 “Atlanta 500” List

    Nicholas A. Thede Joins Ball Janik LLP

    California to Require Disclosure of Construction Defect Claims

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

    Detect and Prevent Construction Fraud

    Second Circuit Brings Clarity To Scope of “Joint Employer” Theory in Discrimination Cases

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Business Interruption, COVID-19 Claims Under Pollution Policy Fails

    McDermott International and BP Team Arbitrate $535M LNG Site Dispute

    Stop Losing Proposal Competitions

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    The Colorado Supreme Court affirms Woodbridge II’s “Adverse Use” Distinction

    The Anatomy of a Construction Dispute Stage 3- The Last Straw

    How the Parking Garage Conquered the City

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    Gen Xers Choose to Rent rather than Buy

    In Oregon Construction Defect Claims, “Contract Is (Still) King”

    Can a Receiver Prime and Strip Liens Against Real Property?

    Video: Contractors’ Update on New Regulations Governing Commercial Use of Drones

    Chinese Millionaire Roils Brokers Over Shrinking Mansion

    Citigroup Reaches $1.13 Billion Pact Over Mortgage Bonds

    Pennsylvania Federal Court Confirms: Construction Defect Claims Not Covered by CGL Policies

    Rams Owner Stan Kroenke Debuts His $5.5 Billion Dream Stadium

    Colorado Legislature Kills SB 20-138 – A Bill to Extend Colorado’s Statute of Repose

    EPA Issues Interpretive Statement on Application of NPDES Permit System to Releases of Pollutants to Groundwater

    New York Appellate Division Reverses Denial of Landlord’s Additional Insured Tender

    Best Lawyers Honors 43 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys, Recognizes Three Partners as 'Lawyers of The Year'

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    Hunton Offers Amicus Support in First Circuit Review of “Surface Water” Under Massachusetts Law

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    Axa Buys London Pinnacle Site for Redesigned Skyscraper

    Enforceability Of Subcontract “Pay-When-Paid” Provisions – An Important Update

    Will Maryland Beltway Developer's Exit Doom $7.6B P3 Project?

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    What Made the Savannah Harbor Upgrade So Complicated?

    Corps Spells Out Billions in Infrastructure Act Allocations

    Be Careful with Continuous Breach and Statute of Limitations

    One Stat About Bathrooms Explains Why You Can’t Find a House

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage

    Missouri Asbestos Litigation Reform: New Bill Seeks to Establish Robust Disclosure Obligations

    APROPLAN and GenieBelt Merge, Creating “LetsBuild” – the Build Phase End-to-End Digital Platform

    How Drones are Speeding Up Construction

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Listed in the Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    Contractor’s Assignment of Construction Contract to Newly Formed Company Before Company Was Licensed, Not Subject to B&P 7031

    Newmeyer & Dillion Gets Top-Tier Practice Area Rankings on U.S. News – Best Lawyers List

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    Hawaii Appellate Court Finds Duty to Defend Group Builders Case
    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. Leveraging 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

    Negligence Against a Construction Manager Agent

    March 22, 2018 —

    Can a construction manager-agent / owner’s representative hired directly by the owner be liable to the general contractor in negligence? An argument likely posited by many general contractors on projects gone awry where there is a separate construction manager. Well, here is an interesting case out of Louisiana that supports a negligence claim against a construction manager-agent.

    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

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    October 17, 2022 —
    Summary judgment awarded to the insurer was reversed because the insurer presented no evidence of prejudice caused by untimely notice. Perez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 5435 (Fla. Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2022). The insureds' home suffered water damage due to Hurricane Irma around September 10, 2017. A claim was submitted to Citizens on November 27, 2018. Citizens had an independent adjuster inspect, but then denied the claim due to untimely notice. The insureds sued and Citizens moved for summary judgment. Citizens argued it was prejudiced because it could not confirm the cause of the loss or the property damage attributed to it. The court agreed that the insureds' notice was untimely. The insureds were notified by tenants renting the property that leaks appeared around the time of Hurriane Irma. The policy language, however, placed the burden to rebut the presumption of prejudice caused by late notice on Citizens. Whether the insurer was prejudiced was a question of fact. Citizens failed to demonstrate any prejudice due to the untimely notice. 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

    Waiver of Subrogation Enforced, Denying Insurers Recovery Against Additional Insured in $500 Million Off-Shore Oil Rig Loss

    September 30, 2019 —
    The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas recently rejected a claim by a group of insurance companies (“Underwriters”) against American Global Maritime Inc. for more than $500 million that the Underwriters paid the named insured under an Off-Shore Construction Risk insurance policy for losses resulting from the an alleged off-shore oil rig failure. The action arose out of alleged construction defects related to Chevron’s “Big Foot” oil-drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico. Chevron hired American Global to be the marine warranty surveyor responsible for reviewing and certifying the project’s specifications and materials. American Global issued the certificate of approval required for the project to proceed; however, during the attempted installation of the platform in 2015, it was alleged that parts from the structure fell to the sea floor. The Underwriters paid more than $500 million in connection with the incident under an Off-Shore Construction insurance policy they had issued to Chevron. After paying the claim, the Underwriters filed a negligence action against American Global and other contractors involved in the project. Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews & Kurth and Daniel Hentschel , Hunton Andrews & Kurth Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com Mr. Hentschel may be contacted at dhentschel@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Senator Ray Scott Introduced a Bill to Reduce Colorado’s Statute of Repose for Construction Defect Actions to Four Years

    January 21, 2015 —
    For those of you reading this blog who are familiar with Colorado’s law as it pertains to construction defect actions, which I assume to be anyone reading this blog as it does not seem to get much random traffic, you are probably aware that the statute of repose applicable to construction defect actions in Colorado is generally thought of as being six plus two years. Specifically, C.R.S. § 13-80-104 states, in pertinent part:
    (1)(a) Notwithstanding any statutory provision to the contrary, all actions against any architect, contractor, builder or builder vendor, engineer, or inspector performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, inspection, construction, or observation of construction of any improvement to real property shall be brought within the time provided in section 13-80-102 after the claim for relief arises, and not thereafter, but in no case shall such an action be brought more than six years after the substantial completion of the improvement to the real property, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. McLain, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. McLain may be contacted at mclain@hhmrlaw.com

    Triggering Duty to Advance Costs Same Standard as Duty to Defend

    April 11, 2018 —
    Interpreting Hawaii law, the federal district court held that the standard for triggering the duty to defend is the same as the standard for the duty to advance costs under a D&O policy. Maui Land & Pineapple Co. v. Liberty Ins. Underwriters, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56949 (D. Haw. April 3, 2018). The underlying plaintiffs sued 22 defendants, including Maui Land Pineapple (MLP) and Ryan L. Churchill, concerning a residential development project known as The Ritz-Carlton Club & Residences. The underlying complaint alleged that MLP "directly or indirectly through wholly owned subsidiaries exerts control" over Kapalua Bay, LLC, the defendant in the underlying lawsuit. Kapalua Bay, LLC was created as a joint venture of which MLP held 51%. Churchill was a senior executive officer of MLP, President of Kapalua Bay, and an executive officer of Kapalua Realty, which participated in all aspects of the Project, such as financing, development, and construction. In their second amended complaint, the underlying plaintiffs alleged nine Counts against the defendants, including breach of fiduciary duty. It was alleged that defendants were not transparent and kept owners in the dark regarding the status of the project. Several allegations named Churchill individually and described his alleged material misrepresentations to the underlying plaintiffs regarding the project's financing. 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

    Private Mediations Do Not Toll The Five-Year Prosecution Statute

    April 28, 2016 —
    If you thought private mediation could toll the five-year period for case prosecution – think again. In a recent decision handed down by the Second District Court of Appeal, the court unequivocally held that voluntary, private mediations do not toll the five-year period before dismissal for failure to bring an action to trial. California Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310 sets forth the applicable rule: “[a]n action shall be brought to trial within five years after the action is commenced against the defendant.” Section 1775.7(b) clarifies this rule, stating that the five-year period can be tolled if it is “submitted to mediation” within the final six months of the five-year period. However, the Code is silent with respect to the effect of tolling on public versus private mediations. The Court of Appeal addressed this issue in its recent decision entitled Castillo v. DHL Express (USA) (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 1186. Castillo was an employment class action brought by truck drivers against their employers. Plaintiffs argued that the case was “submitted to mediation” within the meaning of Section 1775.7(b) because the court’s Case Management Order reflected the fact that the parties agreed to pursue mediation. Conversely, defendants argued that the Case Management Statement clearly stated that the parties voluntarily agreed to a private mediation, not a court-ordered mediation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zachary P. Marks, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger In Focus
    Mr. Marks may be contacted at zmarks@cgdrblaw.com

    Surplus Lines Carriers Cannot Compel Arbitration in Louisiana

    May 29, 2023 —
    The court denied the surplus lines insurer's motion to compel arbitration based on Lousiana's law prohibiting arbitrations of coverage disputes. Fairway Village Condominiums v. Independent Spec. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62135 (E.D. La. April 20, 2023). The plaintiff's condominium complex was damaged by Hurricane Ida. A claim was filed with the insurer. The insurer made an initial advance payment of $200,000. Three additional payments were made bringing the total to $951,462.49, which was less than half of the proof of loss amounts submitted by plaintiff. Plaintiff sued the insurer for breach of contract and bad faith. The insurer filed a motion to compel arbitration based upon an arbitration provision in the policy. Recognizing that Louisiana law prohibited enforcement of a policy's arbitration clause, the insurer argued it did not apply because it was a surplus lines carrier. 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

    Subrogation 101 (and Why Should I Care?)

    July 16, 2023 —
    What is subrogation? Why am I being asked to waive it? Should I care? To answer that last question, let’s take a quick run at the first two. What Is Subrogation? “Subrogation” refers to the act of one person or party standing in the place of another person or party. It is a legal right held by most insurance carriers to pursue a third party that caused an insurance loss in order to recover the amount the insurance carrier paid the insured to cover the loss. This occurs when (i) the insurance carrier makes a payment on behalf of its insured as the result of a covered accident or injury, and then (ii) the insurer then seeks repayment from the at-fault party. Reprinted courtesy of Clark Thiel, Pillsbury and Alexis N. Wansac, Pillsbury Mr. Thiel may be contacted at clark.thiel@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Wansac may be contacted at alexis.wansac@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of