BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes 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 institutional building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessSeattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington stucco expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure 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


    Sanctions of $1.6 Million Plus Imposed on Contractor for Fabricating Evidence

    The Prompt Payment Rollercoaster

    Dreyer v. Am. Natl. Prop. & Cas. Co. Or: Do Not Enter into Nunn-Agreements for Injuries that Occurred After Expiration of the Subject Insurance Policy

    OSHA Updates: New Submission Requirements for Injury and Illness Records

    Key Economic & Geopolitical Themes To Monitor In 2024

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

    OSHA Advisory Committee, Assemble!

    The Importance of a Notice of Completion to Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    Insurance Company Prevails in “Chinese Drywall” Case

    Liability Policy’s Arbitration Endorsement Applies to Third Party Beneficiaries, Including Additional Insureds

    Nine Haight Attorneys Selected for Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch 2021

    A General Contractors Guide to Bond Thresholds by State

    D.C. Decision Finding No “Direct Physical Loss” for COVID-19 Closures Is Not Without Severe Limitations

    Motions to Dismiss, Limitations of Liability, and More

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    BIOHM Seeks to Turn Plastic Waste into Insulation Material with Mushrooms

    Committeewoman Requests Refund on Attorney Fees after Failed Legal Efforts

    Landmark Montana Supreme Court Decision Series: The Duty to Defend

    Spearin Doctrine as an Affirmative Defense

    Ohio Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Determining Duty to Defend in Wisconsin Does Not Include Extrinsic Evidence

    White and Williams Recognizes Women’s History Month: Remembering Virginia Barton Wallace

    Heavy Rains Cause Flooding, Mudslides in Japan

    Unjust Enrichment Claims When There Is No Binding Contract

    Invest In America Act Offers 494 Billion In Funding to U.S. Infrastructure and Millions of New Jobs

    WSHB Ranked 4th Most Diverse Law Firm in U.S.

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    World Green Building Council Calls for Net-Zero Embodied Carbon in Buildings by 2050

    Almost Nothing Is Impossible

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Court Grants Summary Judgment to Insurer in HVAC Defect Case

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    TOP TAKE-AWAY SERIES: The 2023 Annual Meeting in Vancouver

    NYC Building Explosion Kills Two After Neighbor Reports Gas Leak

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment to Reject Collapse Coverage Denied

    Navigating Threshold Arbitration Issues in Construction Contracts

    Colorado’s Federal District Court Finds Carriers Have Joint and Several Defense Duties

    A Subcontractor’s Perspective On California’s Recent Changes to Indemnity Provisions

    Terms of Your Teaming Agreement Matter

    To Arbitrate or Not to Arbitrate? That is the Question

    City of Sacramento Approves Kings NBA Financing Plan

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    New Change Order Bill Becomes Law: RCW 39.04.360

    Wisconsin Court Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusion in E&O Policy

    Buyer Alleges Condo Full of Mold and Mice

    Insurance Tips for Contractors

    Design, Legal and Accounting all Fight a War on Billable Hours After the Advent of AI

    Factories Boost U.S. Output as Builders Gain Confidence: Economy
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Seattle's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    San Diego Developer Strikes Out on “Disguised Taking” Claim

    October 26, 2017 —
    In Dryden Oaks, LLC v. San Diego County Regional Airport Authority et al.(D068161, filed 9/26/17, publication order 10/19/17), the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District held that the County of San Diego (County) and the San Diego Regional Airport Authority (Authority) were entitled to summary judgment on a developer’s “disguised taking” theory of inverse condemnation. In 2001, the developer purchased two large lots (designated Lot 24 and Lot 25) adjacent to the end of a runway at the Palomar Airport in Carlsbad. Plaintiff obtained the necessary permits from the City of Carlsbad and successfully completed construction of an industrial building on Lot 24 in 2005. However, the plaintiff never began development of Lot 25 and the building permit for the property expired in 2012. The developer was then unable to renew the building permit because the Authority had adopted the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) in the interim period, which reclassified the Lots as part of a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). The developer received a letter explaining that “despite the earlier approval the proposed development was no longer feasible because the ALUCP was more restrictive than the prior compatibility plan and the application's proposed use of ‘research and development’ was not permissible.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael C. Parme, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP
    Mr. Parme may be contacted at mparme@hbblaw.com

    Federal Court Again Confirms No Coverage For Construction Defects in Hawaii

    July 28, 2016 —
    The Hawaii federal district court confirmed its prior holdings that there is no duty to defend or indemnify for property damage caused by faulty workmanship. State Farm Fire & Cas Co. v. GP West, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74240 (D. Haw. Jun 7, 2016). (Full disclosure - our office represents GP West in this matter). GP West, the contractor, and Air Conditioning of Maui, Inc. (AC Maui), the subcontractor, were sued by the owner of a veterinary clinic for installation of an alleged defective HVAC system. GP West contracted with the owner to build the clinic. AC Maui was the HVAC subcontractor and designed, sized and priced a HVAC system for the clinic. The underlying complaint alleged that after the building was substantially complete, the HVAC system experienced multiple equipment defects and mechanical breakdowns, and did not properly dehumidify the building. 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

    New Jersey Court Rules on Statue of Repose Case

    May 26, 2011 —

    A three-judge panel issued a per curium ruling on May 23 in Fairview Heights Condo. v. Investors (N.J. Super., 2011), a case which the members of a condominium board argued: “that the judge erred by: 1) dismissing plaintiff’s claims against RLI based upon the statute of repose; 2) dismissing the breach of fiduciary duty claims against the Luppinos based upon a lack of expert opinion; 3) barring the testimony of Gonzalez; and 4) barring the May 23, 1989 job site report.” The court rejected all claims from the condominium board.

    The court found that the building must be unsafe for the statute of repose to apply. They noted, “the judge made no findings on whether the water seepage, or the property damage caused by such seepage, in any way rendered the building, or any of the units, unsafe.” Further, “without a specific finding on the question of whether the defects had rendered the building ‘unsafe,’ defendants were not entitled to the benefit of the ten-year statute of repose.“

    On the second point, the court also upheld the lower court’s findings regarding the management company:

    “The report submitted by Berman establishes that the EIFS product was defective in its design and would therefore have failed from the outset. The defects in that product were, according to Berman, not prone to repair or other mitigation. Therefore, even if defendants did not appropriately inspect or repair the EIFS, their failure to do so would have had no impact on the long-term performance of the EIFS exterior cladding. As plaintiff failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on these questions, the judge properly granted summary judgment to the Luppinos on plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty claim.”

    On the final two points, the judges noted “plaintiff maintains that the judge committed reversible error when he excluded the Gonzalez certification and the 1989 job site report prepared by Raymond Brzuchalski.” They saw “no abuse of discretion related to the exclusion of the Gonzalez certification, and reject plaintiff’s arguments to the contrary.” Of the job site report, they found, “no abuse of discretion in the judge's finding that the Brzuchalski 1989 job site report did not satisfy the requirements of N.J.R.E.803(c)(6).”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    December 09, 2011 —

    The Maryland Court of Special Appeals has ruled that condominium association boards have a duty to “properly pursue any claims,” overturning the decision of a lower court that said that it had no legal duty to file suit. Tom Schild, writing at Marylandcondominiumlaw.net, writes about Greenstein v. Avalon Courts Six Condominium, Inc.

    In this case, the condominium board waited six years after residents complained about water intrusion problems before suing the developer. The court ruled that the suit could not be filed, as the statute of limitations was only three years. After residents were assessed for the repairs, homeowners sued the board, arguing that their delay lead to the need for the special assessment.

    After overturning the decision, the Court of Special Appeals has asked the trial court to review the negligence claim.

    Read the full story…

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

    Eleventh Circuit Reverses Attorneys’ Fee Award to Performance Bond Sureties in Dispute with Contractor arising from Claim against Subcontractor Performance Bond

    February 27, 2019 —
    On October 26, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (the “Eleventh Circuit”) issued a decision which reversed an award of prevailing party attorneys’ fees to performance bond sureties in their dispute with a contractor arising from the contractor’s claim against a subcontractor’s performance bond. Had the lower court’s decision been affirmed, the performance bond sureties would have been able to recover prevailing party attorneys’ fees against the contractor even though they were not parties to the underlying subcontract and the subcontract did not contain a prevailing party attorneys’ fee provision. The underlying case is complicated and arose from the construction of Brickell CityCentre in Miami. Americaribe-Moriarty JV (the “Contractor”) asserted a claim against a performance bond procured by a defaulted subcontractor and issued by International Fidelity Insurance Company and Allegheny Casualty Company (collectively, the “Sureties”). The Sureties filed a declaratory judgment action against the Contractor in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (the “District Court”), seeking a declaration that the Contractor failed to perfect its claim against the performance bond. Reprinted courtesy of Gary M. Stein, Peckar & Abramson and K. Stefan Chin, Peckar & Abramson Mr. Stein may be contacted at gstein@pecklaw.com Mr. Chin may be contacted at kschin@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Allegations of Collapse Rejected

    August 08, 2018 —
    In yet another of the collapse cases being litigated in state and federal courts in Connecticut, the federal district court denied the insurer's motion to dismiss. Rosenberger v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95345 (D. Conn. June 6, 2018). The insureds had policies with Amica since 1989. Policies before December 18, 2006, covered collapse caused by hidden decay or other specified causes. "Collapse" was not defined by the policy. These policies did not include any provisions explicitly excluding coverage for a chemical reaction. The post-2006 policies held by the insureds covered collapse, but under a significantly modified definition. The newer policy language stated that "collapse applies only to an abrupt collapse." Further, collapse was defined as "an abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or any part of a building with the result that the building or part of the building cannot be occupied for its intended purpose." 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

    Water Intrusion Judged Not Related to Construction

    October 09, 2013 —
    A Wisconsin couple has lost their lawsuit against the city of Stoughton. Jerry and Maxine King claimed that construction of the Stoughton Fire Station lead to flooding of their basement. The city conceded that in 2008, the contractor failed to “have in place some of the measures that could have prevented the water from running onto the King property.” The contractor’s insurance company compensated the Kings. Subsequently, the Kings complained of further water damage. But Matt Dregne, Stoughton’s attorney, said that the Kings “didn’t repair the basement.” The judge in the case dismissed the suit with prejudice, disallowing any further suits from the Kings on these circumstances. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (03/01/23) – Mass Timber, IIJA Funding, and Distressed Real Estate

    March 13, 2023 —
    This week’s round-up explores how Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) funding is being deployed, mass timber is on the rise as decarbonization efforts continue, and commercial real estate remains distressed.
    • With a flurry of high-profile projects, mass timber is gaining traction. (Jeffrey Steele, Commercial Property Executive)
    • Commercial real estate is experiencing high levels of distress, with multiple owners defaulting on loans across the country. (Ted Glanzer, The Real Deal)
    • Even with the recent downturn in cryptocurrency value, the metaverse real estate market is expected to continue to grow. (The Real Deal)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team