BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington forensic architectSeattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessesSeattle Washington construction defect 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


    Latosha Ellis Joins The National Black Lawyers Top 40 Under 40

    White House Hopefuls Make Pitches to Construction Unions

    Condominiums and Homeowners Associations Remain Popular Housing Choices for U-S Homeowners

    US Court Disputes $1.8B AECOM Damage Award in ‘Remarkable Fraud’ Suit

    Navigating the New Landscape: How AB 12 and SB 567 Impact Landlords and Tenants in California

    #7 CDJ Topic: Truck Ins. Exchange v. O'Mailia

    Award Doubled in Retrial of New Jersey Elevator Injury Case

    Predicting Our Future with Andrew Weinreich

    Construction Defect Leads to Death, Jury Awards $39 Million

    Insurer Must Defend Insured Against Construction Defect Claims

    Insurer's Refusal to Consider Supplemental Claim Found Improper

    Haight Ranked in 2018 U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" List

    Repairs Commencing on Defect-Ridden House from Failed State Supreme Court Case

    Congratulations to San Diego Partner Alex Giannetto and Senior Associate Michael Ibach on Settling a Case 3 Weeks Into a 5-Week Trial!

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    Court’s Ruling on SB800 “Surprising to Some”

    10 Answers to Those Nagging Mechanics Lien Questions Keeping You Up at Night. Kind of

    Don’t Get Caught Holding the Bag: Hold the State Liable When General Contractor Fails to Pay on a Public Project.

    The Secret to an OSHA Inspection

    Federal Lawsuit Accuses MOX Contractors of Fraud

    HOA Group Speaking Out Against Draft of Colorado’s Construction Defects Bill

    AFL-CIO Joins in $10 Billion Infrastructure Plan

    Supreme Court Holds Arbitrator can Fully Decide Threshold Arbitrability Issue

    Drafting the Bond Form, Particularly Performance Bond Form

    Quick Note: Submitting Civil Remedy Notice

    Design-Assist, an Ambiguous Term Causing Conflict in the Construction Industry[1]

    Asbestos Client Alert: Court’s Exclusive Gatekeeper Role May not be Ignored or Shifted to a Jury

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    The Status of OSHA’s Impending Heat Stress Standard

    Out of the Black

    Sales of Existing U.S. Homes Unexpectedly Fell in January

    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates

    When it Comes to COVID Emergency Regulations, Have a Plan

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    Motion to Dismiss COVID Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    Quick Note: Notice of Contest of Claim Against Payment Bond

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team on Obtaining a Defense Verdict in Favor of their Subcontractor Client!

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    Dynamics of Managing Professional Liability Claims for Design Builders

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved

    Construction Defect Coverage Summary 2013: The Business Risks Shift To Insurers

    Court Rules that Collapse Coverage for Damage Caused “Only By” Specified Perils Violates Efficient Proximate Cause Rule and is Unenforceable

    Designers “Airpocalyspe” Creations

    Report to Congress Calls for Framework to Cut Post-Quake Recovery Time

    Lakewood Introduced City Ordinance to Battle Colorado’s CD Law

    Despite Construction Gains, Cement Maker Sees Loss

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    Home-Rentals Wall Street Made Say Grow or Go: Real Estate

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    New York Team’s Win Limits Scope of Property Owners’ Duties to Workers for Hazards Inherent in Their Work
    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

    Brief Overview of Rights of Unlicensed Contractors in California

    September 10, 2014 —
    Under California Contractor’s State License Law enumerated in Business and Professions Code Sections 7000 to 7191, a contractor may not “bring or maintain” any action for compensation for performing any act or contract for which a license is required unless the contractor was duly licensed “at all times” during performance. Bus & Prof Code Section 7031(a). What does this mean and who does it include? This is a question that often has to be answered on a case by case basis. Basically, California does not want unlicensed contractors to be able to get paid for work that should be performed by a licensed contractor. The law has set forth some general parameters. General contractors, subcontractors, and master developers must be licensed. However, suppliers, manufacturers, laborers and equipment lessors are exempt and do not need a contractor’s license. Essentially, those parties that merely furnish material or supplies without fabricating them into, or consuming them in the performance of work, do not need to be licensed. Bus & Prof Code Section 7052. There are sever fines and penalties for those who improperly perform construction work without a license. A contract between any contractor and an unlicensed subcontractor is a misdemeanor. Lack of a license bars all actions in law or in equity for collection of compensation for the performance of work requiring a license. There are very few exceptions to this rule. A “savvy” unlicensed contractor cannot simply avoid these requirements by “subbing” out all the work to licensed contractors. Any person who uses the services of an unlicensed contractor may file a court action or cross-complaint to recover all payments made to the unlicensed contractor. In addition, a person who uses the services of an unlicensed contractor is a victim of a crime and eligible for restitution of economic losses regardless of whether that person had knowledge that the contractor was unlicensed. Bus. & Prof Code Sections 7028, 7028.16. It goes without saying that performing work without a license on projects is a bad idea. Reprinted courtesy of William M. Kaufman, Lockhart Park LP Mr. Kaufman may be contacted at wkaufman@lockhartpark.com, and you may visit the firm's website at www.lockhartpark.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Deterioration Known To Insured Forecloses Collapse Coverage

    January 28, 2019 —
    The insurer properly denied coverage for collapse of a building when the insured knew from an expert’s examination that the walls of his house were deteriorating. Jaimes v. Liberty Ins. Corp., 2018 U. S. Dust. LEXIS 198224 (D. Colo. Nov. 21, 2018). The insured discovered a crack in the wall of his home. He hired Anchor Engineering to inspect. Anchor found a large bulge in the south wall. Several problems with deterioration were noted in the basement. The structure of the house was unstable and dangerous. The insured filed a claim with his homeowners insurer, Liberty. The claim was denied because damage to the wall was the result of deterioration. The south wall of the house later collapsed. The insured submitted a second claim. Liberty again denied the claim because the collapse was the result of deterioration of the wall. The insured sued. 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

    Legislatures Shouldn’t Try to Do the Courts’ Job

    March 01, 2012 —

    David Thamann, writing in Property Casualty 360, argues that current actions by legislatures on insurance coverage amount to “legislative interference or overreach.” He notes that under current Colorado law, “a court shall presume that the work of a construction professional that results in property damage — including damage to the work itself or other work — is an accident unless the property damage is intended and expected by the insured.” He argues that here legislators are stepping into the role of the courts. “Insureds and insurers are not always going to be pleased with a court ruling, but that is the system we have.”

    Read the full story…

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

    Hotel Claims Construction Defect Could Have Caused Collapse

    December 30, 2013 —
    The owners of the Crowne Plaza New Orleans Airport, in Kenner, Louisiana, have filed a lawsuit claiming that a defective beam installed during renovations put the building at risk of collapse, reports The Louisiana Record. The hotel was sold to its current owners, 2929 Williams Blvd, LLC, in 2006, and the renovations began after Hurricane Katrina in 2007. The renovations converted an indoor pool area into a ballroom. The renovations were finished in 2008, but hotel staff noticed the walls and ceiling of the ballroom were sagging by September 2011. A structural engineer determined that a main beam had failed, risking collapse of the entire building. The hotel owners set upon repairing the structure and now seek reimbursement. 2929 Williams Blvd., LLC is suing Trimark Constructors LLC, Kyle Associates LLC, and Avengo Baily & Associates, Inc. for an unspecified amount of damages. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New York Revises Retainage Requirements for Private Construction Contracts: Overview of the “5% Retainage Law”

    January 22, 2024 —
    On November 17, 2023, the State of New York enacted the “5% Retainage Law.” This legislation effectively limits the amount of retainage that can be held from general contractors and subcontractors to no more than 5%. It applies to many but not all construction contracts. In addition, the new law revises late stage billing requirements, enabling contractors to invoice for retainage at substantial completion. Previously, the parties to a construction contract were free to negotiate any retainage amount, limited only by an unspecified “reasonable amount” that would be released as the parties contractually set forth. Summary The new law amends Sections 756-a and 756-c of the General Business Law (part of Article 35E of the GBL, known as the “Prompt Pay Act”), and applies to private construction contracts “where the aggregate cost of the construction project, including all labor, services, materials and equipment to be furnished, equals or exceeds one hundred fifty thousand dollars.” Reprinted courtesy of Levi W. Barrett, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Patrick T. Murray, Peckar & Abramson, P.C., Skyler L. Santomartino, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Mark A. Snyder, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Barrett may be contacted at lbarrett@pecklaw.com Mr. Murray may be contacted at pmurray@pecklaw.com Mr. Santomartino may be contacted at ssantomartino@pecklaw.com Mr. Snyder may be contacted at msnyder@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Subcontractors Have Remedies, Even if “Pay-if-Paid” Provisions are Enforced

    February 19, 2019 —
    In a recent case in Kentucky[1], a sub-tier subcontractor sued the general contractor and owner for failure to pay for extra work. At the trial, the court held the subcontractor was entitled to recover under the theories of implied contracts and unjust enrichment, even though the subcontract contained a “pay-if-paid” clause. All parties appealed. In particular, the general contractor asserted that the pay-if-paid provision in the subcontract precluded recovery by the subcontractor. The issue was petitioned to the Supreme Court of Kentucky. The question to be resolved by the Supreme Court of Kentucky was whether a pay-if-paid provision was enforceable as between a general contractor and subcontractor, and if so, whether the subcontractor could nevertheless pursue the owner directly for payment notwithstanding a lack of privity between the owner and subcontractor. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Insurance Salesman had No Fiduciary Duty to Policyholders

    July 19, 2017 —
    On June 20, 2017, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a life insurance salesman had no fiduciary duty to his customers where the customers retained decision-making authority regarding which policies to purchase. In Yenchi v. Ameriprise Fin., Inc., the Court returned a 4-2 verdict, overturning the lower court’s finding that it was possible that a fiduciary relationship existed between the parties. The suit arose from a series of transactions between Eugene and Ruth Yenchi and Bryan Holland, a financial advisor for IDS Life Insurance Corporation. The relationship began when Holland cold-called the Yenchis and asked to meet with them regarding their “financial stuff.” For a fee of $350, Holland met with the Yenchis on several occasions and counseled them regarding their insurance needs. On Holland’s advice, the Yenchis cashed out several existing polices and purchased a whole-life policy for Mr. Yenchi and a deferred variable annuity in Mrs. Yenchi’s name. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Austin D. Moody, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Mr. Moody may be contacted at adm@sdvlaw.com

    What Are The Most Commonly Claimed Issues In Construction Defect Litigation?

    April 22, 2019 —
    As a lawyer that has spent his career defending against construction defect claims, one of the most common questions I get when counseling clients regarding risk management is: “What are the most commonly claimed issues in construction defect litigation?” Until very recently, my answer to this question has been based on my own experience and knowledge on the subject, and only vaguely reliant on empirical data. Recently, two engineers, Elizabeth Brogan and William McConnell, along with Caroline Clevenger, an associate professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, wrote a paper entitled “Emerging Patterns in Construction Defect Litigation: A Survey of Construction Cases.” The authors analyzed 41 multifamily construction defect cases litigated in 2015, 2016 and 2017, mostly in the Denver metro area. The authors classified the 55 most prevalent alleged defects into the following categories: structural issues; civil issues; building envelope issues; roof issues; deck, balcony and porch issues; fire protection issues; and miscellaneous issues. The authors then identified the 10 most commonly claimed construction defects, which occurred in over half of all of the cases analyzed. 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