BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington consulting architect 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


    Toolbox Talk Series Recap - Guided Choice Mediation

    Maine Case Demonstrates High Risk for Buying Home “As Is”

    As Laura Wreaks Havoc Along The Gulf, Is Your Insurance Ready to Respond?

    PA Superior Court Provides Clarification on Definition of CGL “Occurrence” When Property Damage Is Caused by Faulty Building Conditions

    Helsinki Stream City: A Re-imagining Outside the System

    Defective Panels Threatening Profit at China Solar Farms: Energy

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    New York Restrictions on Flow Through Provision in Subcontracts

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

    Quick Note: Subcontractor Payment Bond = Common Law Payment Bond

    Georgia State and Local Governments Receive Expanded Authority for Conservation Projects

    New York Condominium Association Files Construction Defect Suit

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    Prevailing Parties Entitled to Contractual Attorneys’ Fees Under California CCP §1717 Notwithstanding Declaration That Contract is Void Under California Government Code §1090

    Federal Court Predicts Coverage In Nevada for Damage Caused by Faulty Workmanship

    Parties Can Agree to Anything In A Settlement Agreement………Or Can They?

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    Important Environmental Insurance Ruling Issued In Protracted Insurance-Coverage Dispute

    The Hazards of Carrier-Specific Manuscript Language: Ohio Casualty's Off-Premises Property Damage and Contractors' E&O Endorsements

    Not in My Kitchen – California Supreme Court Decertifies Golden State Boring Case

    Revisiting the CMO; Are We Overusing the Mediation Privilege?

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    End of an Era: Los Angeles County Superior Court Closes the Personal Injury Hub

    Housing Prices Up through Most of Country

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    Environmental Regulatory Provisions Embedded in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

    Court Retained Jurisdiction to Enforce Settlement Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 Despite Dismissal of Complaint

    BWB&O’s Los Angeles Office Obtains Major Victory in Arbitration!

    Miami Building Boom Spreads Into Downtown’s Tent City

    New Mexico Adopts Right to Repair Act

    French President Vows to Rebuild Fire-Collapsed Notre Dame Roof and Iconic Spire

    Exception to Watercraft Exclusion Does Not Apply

    Construction Defects Lead to “A Pretty Shocking Sight”

    Big Policyholder Win in Michigan

    Developer's Novel Virus-killing Air Filter Ups Standard for Indoor Air Quality

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Certificates of Insurance May Confer Coverage

    Florida Court Gives Parties Assigned a Subrogation Claim a Math Lesson

    Faulty Workmanship Claims Amount to Multiple Occurrences

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 Top Lawyers by Hudson Valley Magazine

    ASCE Joins White House Summit on Building Climate-Resilient Communities

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    Three lawyers from Haight were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 Edition

    Trump’s Infrastructure Weak

    Georgia Coal-to-Solar Pivot Shows the Way on Climate Regs

    Homeowner may pursue negligence claim for construction defect, Oregon Supreme Court holds

    Orange County Team Obtains Unanimous Defense Verdict in Case Involving Failed Real Estate Transaction

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    25 Years of West Coast Casualty’s Construction Defect Seminar
    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

    The Project “Completion” Paradox in California

    April 06, 2016 —
    We’ve written before about why the date of “completion” on a California construction project is important, and why, if I may be blunt, determining that date can be as frustrating as a one-legged man in a game of kickass. You see, in California the deadline to record a mechanics lien, serve a stop payment notice, or make a payment bond claim – important construction payment remedies the California State Legislature saw fit to help you get paid – often depends on when a project is “completed.” So, for example, the deadline for direct contractors to record a mechanics lien is 90 days from completion of the project. 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

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    March 28, 2018 —
    After Hurricane Irma, I wrote an article that contractors should revisit the force majeure provisions in their construction contracts. Not later. But Now. The force majeure provision is an important provision in a construction contract to account for certain uncertainties that you have NO control over. Recently, another reason has given rise to contractors needing to revisit their force majeure provisions, as well as any provisions dealing with material escalations. Not later. But now. The imposition of raw steel and aluminum tariffs (tax on imported goods) and the back-and-forth regarding a potential trade war leads to the kind of uncertainty that should be assessed as a risk. A risk in both time and cost from material escalations. 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

    Disputes Will Not Be Subject to Arbitration Provision If There Is No “Significant Relationship”

    November 29, 2021 —
    As you know from prior articles, arbitration is a creature of contract. This means if you want your disputes to be resolved by binding arbitration, as opposed to litigation, you want to make sure there is an arbitration provision in your contract. If there are certain types of disputes you do not want subject to arbitration, you want to specify those types of disputes/claims in your arbitration provision. If you are not sure, make sure to discuss the pros and cons of arbitration with your counsel when drafting and negotiating the contract. However, even with a broad arbitration provision, there are times where a dispute may still fall out of the scope of the arbitration provision, i.e., the dispute is not arbitrable. If this occurs, such dispute will be resolved by litigation. Parties that have buyer’s remove and do not want to arbitrate their dispute may try to make this argument that the dispute is not subject to the scope of the arbitration provision. There are times this argument carries weight because the dispute has no significant relationship to the agreement with the arbitration provision, as shown below. In Deweees v. Johnson, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D2356b (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), a plaintiff purchased a home in a private residential community. The purchase contract with the developer contained a broad arbitration provision that materially provided that, “all post-closing claims, disputes, and controversies…between purchaser and seller will be resolved by binding arbitration except those arising under section G.5 and G.6 above.” Dewees, supra. Sections G.5 and G.6 provided that the purchaser will not interfere in the sales process with other purchasers and will not interfere with workmen during the construction process. There was also a workmanship and structural defect warranty for the dwelling that also contained an arbitration provision. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Negligence and Private Nuisance

    July 10, 2018 —
    The court determined there was a duty to defend negligence and private nuisance claims for dumping materials on the plaintiffs' property. Peters Heavy Construction, Inc. v. X-Pert One Tracking Corp., 2018 Wisc. App. LEXIS 358 (Wis. Ct. App. March 29, 2018). Peters Heavy Construction sued X-Pert One for negligently depositing shingle materials, tires, and other solid materials on Peters' property, causing damage to Peters, including loss of use of portions of the property. Peters also alleged that X-Pert One's actions negligently created a private nuisance causing harm to Peters' property. X-Pert One's insurer, Northfield Insurance Company, was also 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

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    March 06, 2023 —
    Hunton insurance recovery group partner Larry Bracken and associate Rachel Hudgins were each recognized in Georgia Super Lawyers 2023’s most recent publication. Larry Bracken was recognized as a Super Lawyer, and Rachel Hudgins was selected as a Rising Star for Insurance Coverage. Super Lawyers, a subsidiary of Thomson Reuters, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The patented selection process includes independent research, peer nominations and peer evaluations. Ultimately, no more than 5% of lawyers in a state are selected as Super Lawyers, and less than 2.5% are recognized as Rising Stars. Congratulations to Larry and Rachel on this achievement! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP

    Buy America/Buy American, a Primer For Contractors

    March 23, 2020 —
    President Trump has promoted his campaign agenda—bringing manufacturing jobs back to the United States (especially jobs relating or pertaining to the steel industry.) To do this, he has strengthened domestic preferences through the Buy America and Buy American Acts.[1] 1. Buy America Act: The Buy America Act refers to a collection of domestic contract restrictions pertaining to the U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration projects (highway, mass transit and other transportation projects). The USDOT grants provided to state and local governments prohibit the federal government from obligating funds unless the steel, iron and manufactured products used in the projects are produced in the U.S. Generally, Buy America applies to projects where USDOT provides part of the funding, applies to steel, iron and manufactured products, and requires that “all manufacturing processes, including application of a coating, for these materials…occur in the United States.”
    • Buy American: Buy American is critical for construction contractors because FAR 52.225-9 requires that all federal construction contracts under approximately $7 million[2] contain a clause which mandates that contractors use “only domestic construction material in performing [the] contract.” [Note: This requirement is not limited to steel and steel products, as the Buy America Act is.]
    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

    Avoid Drowning in Data: Keep Afloat with ESI in Construction Litigation

    May 15, 2023 —
    Maybe it is another lawyer on your team, a client, the Court. Maybe it is you. Almost every lawyer has heard (or thought, felt, or anguished over) the following: Wait — What? Discovery is going to cost how much? The concern is real. Per a 2019 Southern District of New York opinion:
    1. The average case can involve collection, review and production of 100 gigabytes of data (or 6.5 million pages of Word documents).
    2. At a typical rate of review of 40-60 documents per hour, assuming 100,000 documents are collected, that is about 2,000 hours of attorney review time.
    3. Adding in fees for forensic collection, storage, and processing to maintain metadata can result in a bill totaling $500,000.
    Brown v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., 474 F. Supp. 3d 637, 645 & n.3 (S.D.N.Y. 2019). What's counsel to do? The following four points can help counsel streamline and reduce costs in discovery: (1) know your case, (2) know your data — understand it and document collection, (3) cooperate with counsel, and (4) implement a protocol for electronically-stored information ("ESI"). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Steve Swart, Williams Mullen
    Mr. Swart may be contacted at sswart@williamsmullen.com

    Court Dismisses Cross Claims Against Utility Based on Construction Anti-Indemnity Statute

    August 14, 2018 —
    When a plane crashed and several passengers and crew died or were injured, their representatives sued several defendants, including a nearby plant owner, Milliken & Company (“Plant Owner”), based on claims that transmission lines on Plant Owner’s property were too close to the runways, were too high, and encroached on the airport easements. Plant Owner cross claimed against utility owner, Georgia Power Company (“Utility”). Plant Owner’s claim was based on an easement it granted to Utility, which required Utility to indemnify it for any claims arising out of Utility’s construction or maintenance of the transmission lines. In defense, Utility argued that the easement’s indemnity provision violated Georgia’s construction anti-indemnity statute. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R. Cook, Autry, Hall & Cook, LLP
    Mr. Cook may be contacted at cook@ahclaw.com