BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington consulting architect expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witness public projects
    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


    Houston Home Sales Fall for the First Time in Six Months

    ICE Said to Seek Mortgage Role Through Talks With Data Service

    New York Assembly Reconsiders ‘Bad Faith’ Bill

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    Addenda to Construction Contracts Can Be an Issue

    California Construction Bill Dies in Committee

    Colorado Abandons the “Completed and Accepted Rule” in Favor of the “Foreseeability Rule” in Determining a Contractor’s Duty to a Third Party After Work Has Been Completed

    You May Be Able to Dodge a Bullet, But Not a Gatling Gun

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    N.J. Voters Approve $116 Million in School Construction

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    Hawaii Court Finds No Bad Faith, But Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Survives Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Action

    SB800 Not the Only Remedy for Construction Defects

    Court Extends Insurer Rights to Equitable Contribution

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    One More Statutory Tweak of Interest to VA Construction Pros

    Skyline Bling: A $430 Million Hairpin Tower and Other Naked Bids for Tourism

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Additional Insured in Construction Defect Case

    No Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    ASCE Statement on Passing of Senator Dianne Feinstein

    Illinois Court Assesses Factual Nature of Term “Reside” in Determining Duty to Defend

    Construction Defect Journal Marks First Anniversary

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2024 New York – Metro Super Lawyers®

    Appraisal Panel Can Determine Causation of Loss under Ohio Law

    Are Contracting Parties Treated the Same When it Comes to Notice Obligations?

    Anatomy of a Data Center

    For US Cities in Infrastructure Need, Grant Writers Wanted

    The Right to Repair Act Isn’t Out for the Count, Yet. Homebuilders Fight Back

    "Ordinance or Law" Provision Mandates Coverage for Roof Repair

    Colorado Adopts Twombly-Iqbal “Plausibility” Standard

    Local Government’s Claims on Developer Bonds Dismissed for Failure to Pursue Administrative Remedies

    Read Before You Sign: Claim Waivers in Project Documents

    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    Does Arbitration Apply to Contemporaneously Executed Contracts (When One of the Contracts Does Not Have an Arbitration Provision)?

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Retroactive Application of a Construction Subcontract Containing a Merger Clause? Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal Answers in the Affirmative

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    How Robotics Can Improve Construction and Demolition Waste Sorting

    Unjust Enrichment Claims When There Is No Binding Contract

    Green Buildings Could Lead to Liabilities

    Do Not Forfeit Coverage Under Your Property Insurance Policy

    RCW 82.32.655 Tax Avoidance Statute/Speculative Building

    Payne & Fears Recognized by Best Lawyers in 2025 Best Law Firms®

    Insurer Must Produce Documents After Failing To Show They Are Confidential

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    Patriarch Partners Decision Confirms Government Subpoenas May Constitute a “Claim” Under D&O Policy; Warns Policyholders to Think Broadly When Representing Facts and Circumstances to Insurers

    Construction Spending Drops in March

    “Pay When Paid” Provisions May Not Be Dead, at Least Not Yet

    Paris ‘Locks of Love’ Overload Bridges, Threatening Structures

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!
    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

    Reference to "Man Made" Movement of Earth Corrects Ambiguity

    December 20, 2012 —
    In Pioneer Tower Owners Assn. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 12 NY3d 302 (2009), the New York Court of Appeals found an "earth movement" exclusion was ambiguous when applied to an excavation. The court now considered whether a similar exclusion, expressly made applicable to "man made" movement of earth, eliminated the ambiguity when loss was created by excavation. Bentoria Holdings, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 3087 (N.Y. Oct. 25, 2012). Plaintiff's building suffered cracks due to an excavation being conducted on the lot next door. A claim was submitted to Travelers, plaintiff's insurer. Travelers rejected the claim, relying on the earth movement exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii.
    Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    White and Williams Recognized by BTI Consulting Group for Client Service

    April 12, 2021 —
    White and Williams is proud to be included in BTI Consulting Group’s report of “The 70 Law Firms Improving Client Service Performance More Than All Others." The pandemic forced law firms to navigate and respond instinctively as new client situations popped up daily and weekly. White and Williams was quick to establish a Covid-19 team and resource center to help clients navigate the rapidly developing business and legal issues brought on by the pandemic and provide timely and practical advice. This recognition is a testament to the firm’s commitment to provide clients with best-in-class service and the trust that clients have instilled in the firm. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    Godfather Charged with Insurance Fraud

    July 01, 2011 —

    Texas-based Godfather Construction is a recipient of a fraud suit from the Cook County state attorney’s office. The firm incorporated in Illinois in April 2010, moving there to do business after storms damaged homes in the Chicago suburbs, according to a report in the Chicago Tribune. The state attorney alleges that Godfather brought unlicensed out-of-state workers and the work they performed was “incomplete or shoddy.” Godfather is claimed to have received about $60,000 from Illinois homeowners. The prosecutors are seeking restitution for Godfather’s clients and seek to forbid the firm from doing business in Illinois.

    Read the full story…

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

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    November 05, 2014 —
    Homebuilder Carroll Brock, "whose family-owned company built thousands of Larchmont Homes in the Sacramento region, died Oct. 31 of natural causes in his sleep, his son Steve said," according to the obituary in the Sacramento Bee. "Under Mr. Brock, who was named Sacramento general manager in 1967, Larchmont Homes built nearly 15,000 houses in more than 30 subdivisions of modest ranch-style homes aimed mostly at first-time buyers." Mr. Brock served on the board of the National Association of Home Builders, was past president of the North State Building Industry Association, and had been appointed to the California state Board Standards Commission. Furthermore, he was inducted into the California Building Industry Association Hall of Fame in 1991. Mr. Brock served the community through his work in the Sacramento Area Commerce and Trade Commission as well as the Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. He volunteered his time to the Salvation Army as well as offering construction assistance and expertise to the Fair Oaks Presbyterian Church. “My dad was a humble leader,” his son told the Sacramento Bee. “As successful as he was at building homes, he felt just as strongly about serving others.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Montana Federal District Court Finds for Insurer in Pollution Coverage Dispute

    October 24, 2021 —
    Applying Louisiana law, a recent federal court decision exemplifies why policyholders should thoroughly read claims-made policies to understand when notice is due to insurers and truthfully complete policy applications. In Admiral Insurance Company v. Dual Trucking, Inc.,1 the Court determined the insurer, Admiral Insurance Company (“AIC”), owed no duty to defend or indemnify Dual Trucking and Transport, LLC (“DTT”), Dual Trucking of Montana, LLC (“DTM”), and Dual Trucking, Inc. (“DTI”) (collectively, the “Dual Entities”) under two Environmental Impairment Liability Policies (“EIL Policies”) and four Contractor Pollution Liability Policies (“CPL Policies”). The Court justified its decision because the Dual Entities: 1) did not give notice during the 2012-2013 EIL Policy period; 2) had discovered or knew of, but did not disclose, potential pollution conditions before the inception of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy and before the expiration of the extended reporting period of the 2012-2013 EIL Policy; 3) failed to provide AIC with notice during the extended reporting period of the 2013-2014 EIL Policy of claims for which the Dual Entities were seeking coverage; and 4) materially misrepresented known facts on the CPL Policy applications. I. Factual Background. The Dual Entities were Louisiana-based companies that provided oilfield equipment rental services. In 2011, the Dual Entities leased land in Montana under three leases, collectively referred to as “the Bainville site.” Shortly afterward, the Dual Entities applied for, and AIC issued, an EIL Policy and two CPL Policies with a policy period of October 1, 2012, to October 1, 2013. AIC renewed all three policies for the October 1, 2013, to October 1, 2014, policy period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melanie A. McDonald, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. McDonald may be contacted at MMcDonald@sdvlaw.com

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (06/28/23) – Combating Homelessness, U.S. Public Transportation Costs and the Future of Commercial Real Estate

    August 07, 2023 —
    In our latest roundup, we examine the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding water supply responsibilities, the federal reserve chair’s reaction to possible banking losses, several analyses of the future of commercial real estate, and more!
    • California Representative Maxine Waters has introduced several pieces of legislation aimed at combating homelessness and fixing the increasingly tumultuous affordable housing situation. (Eliza Relman, Business Insider)
    • The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government in a case that decided responsibility over water supply as well as the overall dissemination of water usage for the Navajo Nation. (Ariane de Vogue, CNN)
    • Unlike other nations with similar construction, the United States’ public transportation has extremely high costs. (Darian Woods, Corey Bridges, Viet Le, NPR)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020: Yet Another Reason to Promptly Notify Insurers of COVID-19 Losses

    May 25, 2020 —
    Business interruption coverage stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic is a matter of intense debate. The number of policyholder lawsuits continues to rise sharply and an increasing number of state legislatures are considering laws to specifically address such coverage. Now, additional proposed legislation at the federal level could completely and definitively resolve the debate in favor of coverage for policyholders. The Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020 On April 14, Congress introduced the Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020 (the “Act”) which, if passed, would require insurance companies to cover business interruption losses due to “viral pandemics, forced closures of businesses, mandatory evacuations, and public safety power shut-offs.” The bill further states:
    Any exclusion in a contract for business interruption insurance that is in force on the date of the enactment of this Act shall be void to the extent that it excludes losses specified . . . .
    The draft legislation also specifies that it preempts state approval of any contrary exclusion and renders such approval “void to the extent that it excludes losses specified.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Hultz, Newmeyer Dillion
    Mr. Hultz may be contacted at james.hultz@ndlf.com

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    November 21, 2022 —
    In Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, et al., the Court of Appeals for Ohio’s Eighth District reversed the lower court, finding that money paid by the insured into an abatement fund was “damages” as that undefined term was used in the policyholder’s insurance policies. 2022-Ohio-3031, ¶ 1. Sherwin-Williams is a cautionary tale about how insurers may try to narrow the meaning of undefined terms in their insurance policies. The dispute in Sherwin-Williams focused on coverage for $400 million that the policyholder and other defendants were ordered to pay into an abatement fund to be used by California cities and counties to mitigate the hazards caused by lead paint in homes. Id. ¶ 1. Although the underlying litigation proceeded in California, Ohio law governed coverage, which raised issues of first impression in Ohio. Id. Among other things, the insurers argued that the money paid into the abatement fund did not qualify as “damages” under the policies. Id. ¶ 57. The insured argued that, because the insurers did not define “damages” in the policies, the term had to be given its ordinary meaning. Id. ¶ 56. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of