BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up 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 institutional building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington architectural engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington structural engineering expert witnessesSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    Recovering Attorney’s Fees and Treble Damages in Washington DC Condominium Construction Defect Cases

    Axa Buys London Pinnacle Site for Redesigned Skyscraper

    New Insurance Case: Owners'​ Insurance Barred in Reimbursement Action against Tenant

    How Long does a Florida Condo Association Have to File a Construction Defect Claim?

    Colorado Court of Appeals Decides the Triple Crown Case

    BKV Barnett, LLC v. Electric Drilling Technologies, LLC: Analyzing the Impact of Colorado’s Anti-Indemnification Statute

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

    Going Digital in 2019: The Latest Technology for a Bright Future in Construction

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules in Builder’s Implied Warranty of Habitability Case

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    Re-Thinking the One-Sided Contract: Considerations for a More Balanced Approach to Contracting

    First Trump Agenda Nuggets Hit Construction

    Use Your Instincts when Negotiating a Construction Contract

    The Investors Profiting Off Water Scarcity

    ASBCA Validates New Type of Claim Related to Unfavorable CPARS Review [i]

    Heathrow Speeds New-Runway Spending Before Construction Approval

    Fifth Circuit Asks Texas Supreme Court to Clarify Construction Defect Decision

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    What Do I Do With This Stuff? Dealing With Abandoned Property After Foreclosure

    Nashville Stadium Bond Deal Tests Future of Spectator Sports

    The Murky Waters Between "Good Faith" and "Bad Faith"

    Times Square Alteration Opened Up a Can of Worms

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (3/20/24) – Construction Backlog Falls, National Association of Realtors Settle Litigation, and Commercial Real Estate Market’s Effect on City Cuts

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    Newark Trial Team Secures Affirmance of ‘No Cause’ Verdict for Nationwide Housing Manager & Developer

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    Do Engineers Owe a Duty to Third Parties?

    Latin America’s Biggest Corporate Crime Gets a Worthy Epic

    Breaking with Tradition, The Current NLRB is on a Rulemaking Tear: Election Procedures, Recognition Bar, and 9(a) Collective Bargaining Relationships

    Attorney Writing Series on Misconceptions over Construction Defects

    FBI Makes Arrest Related to Saipan Casino Construction

    Ontario Court of Appeal Clarifies the Meaning of "Living in the Same Household" for Purposes of Coverage Under a Homeowners Policy

    Claimants’ Demand for Superfluous Wording In Release Does Not Excuse Insurer’s Failure to Accept Policy Limit Offer Within Time Specified

    Texas EIFS Case May Have Future Implications for Construction Defects

    What If There Is a Design Error?

    Colorado Court of Appeals Confirms Senior Living Communities as “Residential Properties” for Purposes of the Homeowner Protection Act

    HUD Homeownership Push to Heed Lessons From Crisis, Castro Says

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

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

    Washington Court Limits Lien Rights of Construction Managers

    Couple Sues Attorney over Construction Defect Case, Loses

    SFAA and Coalition of Partners Encourage Lawmakers to Require Essential Surety Bonding Protections on All Federally-Financed Projects Receiving WIFIA Funds

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    TOLLING AGREEMENTS: Construction Defect Lawyers use them to preserve Association Warranty Claims during Construction Defect Negotiations with Developers

    Appraisal Appropriate Despite Pending Coverage Issues

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (01/25/23) – Artificial Intelligence, Proptech Innovation, and Drone Adoption

    Small to Midsize Builders Making Profit on Overlooked Lots

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion to Reject Claim for Construction Defects Upheld
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Excess Carrier Successfully Appeals Primary Insurer’s Summary Judgment Award

    December 09, 2011 —

    Although the excess carrier was given inadequate notice of the underlying arbitration, the trial court determined it shared responsibility with the primary carrier for the arbitration award. Finding disputed issues of fact, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed in Am. States Ins. Co. v. Century Surety Co., 2011 Wash. App. LEXIS 2488 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2011).

    The primary insurer, American States, issued two liability policies to Professional Home Builders (PHB), a siding contractor. The policies were for successive years, 1998-1999 and 1999-2000. Each policy had annual limits of $1 million per occurrence. PHB also had a commercial excess liability policy for 1999-2000 with Century Surety Company.

    PHB was sued by Residential Investment Partners (RIP) for construction defects after moisture entered the building envelope, causing decay and damage. Century’s expert determined the decay started before the 1999-2000 policy period.

    RIP and PHB went to arbitration.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Badly Constructed Masonry Walls Not an Occurrence in Arkansas Law

    May 10, 2012 —

    The US District Court for Maryland has granted a summary judgment in the case Konover Construction Corp. v. ATC Associates to Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company and denied a request for dismissal from ACT. Konover (KBE) was contracted by Wal-Mart to build a Wal-Mart store and a Sam’s Club in Port Covington, Maryland. Superus, Inc. was hired by KBE to build the masonry walls. Superus purchased a policy from Massachusetts Bay Insurance which named KBE as an additional insured. Wal-Mart hired ATC Associates to independently test and inspect the concrete structural steel, and masonry.

    After the building was in use, a large crack appeared which was attributed a latent construction defect. Other cracks were discovered. Upon investigation, it was discovered that there were “voids or foam in the concrete block surrounding the reinforcing steel that should have been filled with grout,” and in some cases, “reinforcing steel was missing or not installed in accordance with the specifications.” KBE paid for the repair and remediation and Wal-Mart assigned all rights and interests against ATC to KBE.

    KBE filed suit against ATC. ATC called for dismissal on the grounds that Wal-Mart had no claims as the problems had been remediated. Wal-Mart then provided KBE with additional agreements to give them enforceable rights against ATC and Superus. KBE filed a fourteen claims against ATC, Superus, and Massachusetts Bay. In the current case, Massachusetts Bay sought summary judgment and ATC sought dismissal of all claims against it.

    Massachusetts Bay claims that they need not indemnify Superus, as “there is no evidence adequate to establish that Superus’ defective work caused any collateral and/or resulting damage that was not subject to an Impaired Property exclusion, and that, in any event, no damage occurred during the policy period.”

    As Wal-Mart is headquarted in Arkansas, certain contracts were under Arkansas law. Under the Arkansas courts, “defective workmanship, standing alone and resulting in damages only to the work product itself, is not an ‘occurrence.’” The court determined that collateral or resultant damage would be covered. The court found that “it is clear under Arkansas law, and the parties appear to agree, that Massachusetts Bay is not obligated to indemnify KBE for any repairs to the masonry walls themselves, including any cracks or gaps in the walls.” The court also found that “there is no evidence adequate to prove that any allegedly resultant property damage was caused by Superus’ faulty construction of the walls.” The court also noted that “if the building code violation and structural integrity problem were ‘property damage,’ insurance coverage would be barred by the Impaired Property Exclusion.” Based on these findings, the court concluded that Massachusetts Bay is entitled to summary judgment.

    While the court dismissed the case against Massachusetts Bay, the court declined ATC’s motion to dismiss. The court noted that ACT’s alleged negligence in conducting inspections “created only a risk of economic loss for KBE.” Although hired by Wal-Mart, ATC “transmitted its daily testing and inspection reports of the Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club projects directly to KBE.” The court found that “KBE has made a plausible claim.”

    ATC also claimed that KBE contributed to the negligence due to the negligence of its subcontractor. The court concluded that it was plausible that “ATC will not be able to carry its burden of proving KBE was contributorily negligent.” The court was less sanguine about KBE’s fraud claim, but though it “may not now appear likely to have merit, it is above the ‘plausibility’ line.”

    In conclusion, KBE may not continue its case against Massachusetts Bay. However, the judge allowed the other proceedings to continue.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Unfair Risk Allocation on Design-Build Projects

    June 13, 2022 —
    The AGC annual convention included a session entitled “Who’s on the Hook for Design Defects in Design-Build Projects.” Fox Rothschild’s Dirk Haire, Les Synder of Infrastructure Construction Brightline West, and David Hecker of Kiewit presented. Attendees crowded into a standing-only room because more and more builders are facing design liability, especially design-builders on large infrastructure projects. The presentation highlighted how some owners abuse the submittal process on design-build jobs to make changes without compensating the builder with more time, money, or both. One project took a sample of owner comments and extrapolated that just one project generated over 15,000 submittals and generated over 110,000 comments of “concern” or “preference.” Certain owner-representatives and attorneys for owners have oversold the risk allocation transfer aspect of design-build. The Spearin Doctrine protects a builder from design documents containing errors by entitling them to receive equitable compensation. The design-build project delivery method erodes potential Spearin protections. Ways that an owner may retain some design responsibility and bring Spearin protections back into play for a builder include the following:
    • Accuracy of reports prepared by owner’s outside consultants
      • Owner’s design approval process
      • Viability of owner’s stated design and project criteria
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Perlberg, ConsensusDocs

    The Future of Construction Tech Is Decision Tech

    August 06, 2019 —
    It doesn’t take much to be catastrophically wrong in construction; some bad information, a touch of misleading intel, a few biased opinions mixed with human error and perhaps a little bad luck to top it off. A poor decision early in a project plants itself like a weed—it grows benignly at first, and becomes gravely pervasive at the end. Being wrong in construction is dangerous. Error leads to leaning towers and broken buildings. Poorly-built structures can hinder economic growth and deprive communities of good infrastructure. For the enterprise, bad decisions can lead to massive financial loss and—worse—human loss on a jobsite. Despite knowing all the dangers, it seems that flawed data, misleading intel and human error have become traits the industry can’t shake. To be clear, construction is one of—if not the most—complex industry in today’s economy. Companies walk a tight rope between a 2% margin on one side and ruinous loss on the other. Under such conditions, it’s easy to see why sustained good judgement is difficult. Reprinted courtesy of Bassem Hamdy, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    After Sixty Years, Subcontractors are Back in the Driver’s Seat in Bidding on California Construction Projects

    September 22, 2016 —
    For almost the last sixty years, the standard for bidding on California construction projects has been governed by the landmark case of Drennan v. Star Paving (1958) 51 Cal.2d 409; which generally states that the contractor bidding to perform work for a project owner is entitled to rely on the bids of subcontractors in formulating its own bid to do the work. Under the equitable legal doctrine of “promissory estoppel”, which serves as the foundation of the Drennan case, even though there was no actual “contract” between the contractor and subcontractor at the time of bid, the contractor was entitled to enforce the subcontractor’s bid in reliance on this doctrine. For bidding purposes, promissory estoppel serves as an equitable substitute for an actual contract. The courts have, since that time, allowed promissory estoppel to act as a substitute for the contract in public bidding because, in equity, when a contractor “reasonably” relies on a subcontractor’s bid in formulating its own bid, it would be unjust to allow the subcontractor to withdraw a bid on which the contractor had relied in submitting its own successful bid. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    The G2G Mid-Year Roundup (2022)

    July 03, 2022 —
    Our mid-year roundup highlights the top-read Gravel2Gavel posts from 2022 so far. Our authors provided deep industry insights and summarized hot topics that addressed various legal implications and disruptions that affected the market, ranging from topics like investing in real estate metaverse to the clean hydrogen transition. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    How To Lock Disputes Out Of Your Project In Construction

    July 22, 2019 —
    Disputes are seen as one of the main threats for the successful completion of a project in construction. There is a plethora of factors which could lead to a construction dispute (e.g. contracts, behavior, environment) but, strangely enough, the industry seems to invest more attention on the resolution of a conflict instead of its prevention. Thanks to the progress that digital technologies have witnessed during the last few years, there is a good chance that things in construction will change for the better soon. The ability to exchange crucial updates in real time, while keeping a detailed record of everything that happens on the field adds an extra level of protection to your project and ensures that all agents are on the same page. In an effort to shed some light on the issue of construction disputes, we present below four tips that could help your team to lock conflicts out of your project: 1. Standardize your processes Before you kickstart your project, it is of paramount importance that you standardize all your systems and processes. In that way, you will be able to add extra clarity to your workflow and eliminate misunderstandings. Once you have achieved that, you can replicate the same process to your future projects. The more you manage to repeat the same project structure the better your team will become in completing their tasks without ending up in any kind of conflict. In that sense, standardization could be a long-term investment for your organization. 2. Go digital As soon as your processes are defined, it is time for the digital journey to begin. Finding the right tool for your project will result in a streamlined construction process where all the members of the team are on the same page without any room for costly mistakes or disagreements. Furthermore, with the help of digital solutions it becomes easier for project managers to measure the performance on site and monitor the completion of the set benchmarks. Like that, all payments will be on time and the program of the project will reflect reality. 3. Be extra careful with the contracts A poorly-written contract can have a big impact on the effort to lock disputes out of your construction project. While putting together a new contract, you should always make sure that you have taken into account all the different scenarios for your project. Either that is a delay due to weather conditions or an accident on site everything should be described in detail in the contracts and be well understood by those in charge. In any other case, things can get a bit risky and a costly dispute might wait to happen. 4. Hold regular meetings with all stakeholders Last but certainly not least, meet regularly with all project stakeholders. The frequent contact with the different members of your team will allow you to discuss and resolve any problematic situations before they grow out of proportion. What is more, regular meetings will help both your field teams and the people in the office to remain aligned and will eliminate the possibility of having people working on outdated versions of the program. Of course, these meetings don’t need to be time-consuming or even in person. With the help of technology, you can keep these meetings short and to the point. In that manner, everybody involved will be able to get the most out of them. Final word All in all, it becomes clear that locking disputes out of your project in construction requires continuous work and a carefully-elaborated plan. Thankfully, the emergence and progress of digital solutions have made this process much easier contributing significantly to the development of the industry far from disputes and project misunderstandings. About the author: Anastasios Koutsogiannis is Content Marketing Manager at LetsBuild. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anastasios Koutsogiannis, LetsBuild

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    June 17, 2015 —
    Through all its ups and downs, the U.S. homebuilding industry is making slow progress. While housing starts declined 11.1 percent in May to a 1.04 million annualized rate, it followed a revised 1.17 million pace the prior month to cap the best back-to-back readings since late 2007, Commerce Department data showed Tuesday in Washington. Permits for future projects climbed to the highest level in almost eight years. The stop-and-go nature of the rebound, which has been exacerbated by the inclement weather that brought construction to a near standstill at the start of the year, masks a steady recovery in the industry at the center of the past recession. While residential real estate has yet to fulfill its typical role as a pillar of this economic expansion, gains in hiring and bigger paychecks are brightening Americans’ moods and could lift home purchases in the second half of 2015. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michelle Jamrisko, Bloomberg