BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expertsSeattle Washington structural engineering expert witnessesSeattle Washington consulting engineersSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington window 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


    Pennsylvania Superior Court Fires up a Case-By-Case Analysis for Landlord-Tenant, Implied Co-Insured Questions

    Contractual “Pay if Paid” and “Pay when Paid” Clauses? What is a California Construction Subcontractor to Do?

    Couple Claims ADA Renovation Lead to Construction Defects

    Savannah Homeowners Win Sizable Judgment in Mold Case against HVAC Contractor

    Second Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of NY’s Zero Emissions Credit Program

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    Recent Developments Involving Cedell v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington

    San Francisco OKs Revamped Settling Millennium Tower Fix

    AB 685 and COVID-19 Workplace Exposure: New California Notice and Reporting Requirements of COVID Exposure Starting January 1, 2021

    Bert L. Howe & Associates Brings Professional Development Series to Their San Antonio Office

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    New Mandatory Bond Notice Forms in Florida

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (6/26/24) – Construction Growth in Office and Data Center Sectors, Slight Ease in Consumer Price Index and Increased Premiums for Commercial Buildings

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    The CA Supreme Court Grants Petition for Review of McMillin Albany LLC v. Super Ct. 2015 F069370 (Cal.App.5 Dist.) As to Whether the Right to Repair Act (SB800) is the Exclusive Remedy for All Defect Claims Arising Out of New Residential Construction

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

    Businesspeople to Nevada: Revoke the Construction Defect Laws

    Paycheck Protection Flexibility Act Of 2020: What You Need to Know

    Following Mishaps, D.C. Metro Presses on With Repairs

    Ensuing Loss Provision Does Not Salvage Coverage

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    NYC Hires Engineer LERA for Parking Garage Collapse Probe

    Temecula Office Secures Approval for Development of 972-Acre Community on Behalf of Pulte Homes

    Court of Appeals Confirms that King County Superior Court’s Jury Selection Process Satisfies Due Process Requirements

    It’s Too Late, Lloyd’s: New York Federal Court Finds Insurer Waived Late Notice Defense

    New York Developer gets Reprieve in Leasehold Battle

    Endorsements Preclude Coverage for Alleged Faulty Workmanship

    Unlicensed Contractor Shoots for the Stars . . . Sputters on Takeoff

    Keep it Simple with Nunn-Agreements in Colorado

    London's Walkie Talkie Tower Voted Britain's Worst New Building

    New York Court Finds No Coverage Owed for Asbestos Losses Because Insured Failed to Prove Material Terms

    Virginia General Assembly Tweaks Pay-if-Paid Ban

    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

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Federal District Court Addresses Material Misrepresentation in First Party Property Damage Claim

    Subcontractor Not Estopped from Enforcing Lien Not Listed In Bankruptcy Petition

    Liability Coverage For Construction Claims May Turn On Narrow Factual Distinctions

    Houses Can Still Make Cents: Illinois’ Implied Warranty of Habitability

    Congratulations to Haight Attorneys Selected to the 2021 Southern California Super Lawyers List

    JD Supra’s 2017 Reader’s Choice Awards

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Las Vegas Team on Obtaining Summary Judgment for the Firm’s Landowner Client!

    Denver’s Mayor Addresses Housing and Modifying Construction Defect Law

    Feds OK $9B Houston Highway Project After Two-Year Pause

    Subcontract Should Flow Down Delay Caused by Subcontractors

    Worker’s Compensation Exclusivity Rule Gets “Trumped” by Indemnity Provision

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    Remodels Replace Construction in Redding

    2014 WCC Panel: Working Smarter with Technology

    No Coverage For Construction Defects Under Alabama Law

    2018 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry
    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. Drawing 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

    ZLien Startup has Discovered a Billion in Payments for Clients

    March 19, 2014 —
    The New Orleans startup company zlien “tracks liens for contractors through an online service” and has “secured more than $1 billion in payments for clients on 33,000 construction projects” according to its founder Scott Wolfe, as reported by The Times-Picayune. When Wolfe practiced law, he noticed “an absence of any centralized service to help firms comply with lien procedures.” Wolfe “saw construction companies hiring small operators, in what he called ‘a very manual, service business,’ to track liens in different states, running the process inconsistently or failing to collect on some liens at all.” Wolfe has entered zlien into “New Orleans Entrepreneur Week on March 28 for the Coulter IDEAPitch, a business competition in front of what The Idea Village organizers describe as an invitation-only audience of ‘world-class investors’ focused on ventures with high growth prospects.” Wolfe told The Times-Picayune that “not getting paid is a central problem in construction. That is something that really strains the construction industry." Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Changes To Commercial Item Contracting

    May 29, 2023 —
    The FAR Council has recently published two changes to commercial item contracting that clarify the definition of commercial services and simplify commercial item determinations (“CIDs”) for contracting officers (“COs”). Since the 1990s, the federal government has encouraged the purchase of commercial items to ease the regulatory burden on vendors who have not previously conducted federal business, encourage innovation, and lower prices[1]. These different objectives (cost savings, broadening markets, innovation) often have corollary policies; for example, vendors who are not accustomed to the regulatory burdens of government business are encouraged to enter the market by being exempted from a slew of regulations (found in standard commercial items clause FAR 52.212-4). As a result, the regulations applicable to commercial item contracting are those required by statute and executive orders in addition to generic commercial terms that may be tailored due to potential variation in commercial terms.[2] Commercial Products v. Commercial Services The first change, in effect since November 2021 pursuant to the 2019 National Defense Authorization (“NDAA”), split the old definition of “commercial item” into two separate definitions: “commercial product” and “commercial service.”[3] We are now blessed with the following definitions of commercial products and services, respectively: Commercial product means— (1) A product, other than real property, that is of a type customarily used by the general public or by nongovernmental entities for purposes other than governmental purposes, and– (i) Has been sold, leased, or licensed to the general public; or (ii) Has been offered for sale, lease, or license to the general public; Reprinted courtesy of Marcos R. Gonzalez, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at mgonzalez@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Supreme Court Finds that the Notice-Prejudice Rule Applicable to Insurance is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

    October 14, 2019 —
    In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Ins. Co. (No. S239510, filed 8/29/19), the California Supreme Court held that California’s notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy in the insurance context, supporting the application of California law under a choice of laws analysis. In addition, the Court held that the rule generally applies to consent (aka “no voluntary payments”) provisions in first party insurance policies but not to consent provisions in third party liability policies. Pitzer College discovered soils contamination while building a new dormitory. Under pressure to complete construction before the start of the school year, Pitzer proceeded to remediate the soils, incurring $2 million in expense. Pitzer submitted a claim to Indian Harbor, which provided Pitzer insurance covering legal and remediation expenses resulting from pollution conditions discovered during the policy period. The policy contained a notice provision requiring Pitzer to provide oral or written notice of any pollution condition to Indian Harbor and, in the event of oral notice, to “furnish … a written report as soon as practicable.” In addition, a consent provision required Pitzer to obtain Indian Harbor’s written consent before incurring expenses, making payments, assuming obligations, and/or commencing remediation due to a pollution condition. The consent provision had an emergency exception for costs incurred “on an emergency basis where any delay … would cause injury to persons or damage to property or increase significantly the cost of responding to any [pollution condition],” in which case Pitzer was required to notify Indian Harbor “immediately thereafter.” Lastly, a choice of law provision stated that New York law governed all matters arising under the policy. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Insurance Coverage Debate on Construction Defects Continues

    February 05, 2015 —
    New Hampshire is the first court of 2015 to weigh in on construction defect coverage issues. The case, Cogswell Farm Condominium Association v. Tower Group, involved a typical situation. Lemery Building Company was hired to build 24 residential condominium units. After construction, the condominium association sued the builder asserting that the weather barrier, including the water/ice shield, flashing, siding, and vapor barrier, was defectively constructed and resulted in damage to the units due to water leaks. The condominium association also sued Lemery’s insurer for a determination as to whether the builder’s Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurer had to provide coverage for the claim. The trial court ruled against the condominium association, finding that the “your work” exclusion applied. The exclusion in the builder’s CGL policy provided that there was no coverage for property damage to “[t]hat particular part of any property that must be restored, repaired or replaced because ‘your work’ was incorrectly performed on it.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    CDJ’s #3 Topic of the Year: Burch v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 223 Cal.App.4th 1411 (2014)

    December 31, 2014 —
    In 2013, the case Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC received a great deal of attention for its possible ramifications to how California’s Right to Repair Act (also known as SB 800) could be applied. However, 2014 had its share of SB 800 policy trends, most notably caused by the ruling in Burch. In their article, “Construction Law Client Alert: California’s Right to Repair Act (SB 800) Takes Another Hit, Then Fights Back,” authors Steven M. Cvitanovic and Whitney L. Stefco, of Haight Brown & Bonesteel, analyzed Burch as well as KB Home Greater Los Angeles v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al., both cases that had ramifications on how California’s Right to Repair Act is applied. Read the full story... Karen L. Moore of Low, Ball & Lynch discussed the Liberty Mutual and Burch cases in her article, “California’s Right to Repair Act is Not a Homeowner’s Exclusive Remedy when Construction Defects cause Actual Property Damage.” Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Toddler Crashes through Window, Falls to his Death

    January 24, 2014 —
    Two-year old Alijah Glenn fell 17 stories to his death after crashing through “a floor-to-ceiling window” at the Crystal Tower apartments in East Cleveland, Ohio, on January 13th, according to The Plain Dealer. Solandra Wallace, East Cleveland’s building and housing manager, told The Plain Dealer that “the city inspects the building whenever a complaint is filed and does not have regular inspections.” The apartment complex “was built in 1966 and would have to adhere to that era's building code standards,” according to the article. The Plain Dealer reports that three complaints have been filed at the Crystal Tower since 2010. A resident complained in 2012 that “her apartment was falling apart, causing water damage and emitting a foul odor,” however, by the time an inspector arrived the ceiling was being fixed. In 2011, an “unspecified roof leak” turned out to be “condensation from a hot pipe.” An elevator was reported inoperable in 2010, however the claim was deemed “invalid” since the elevator worked when inspectors arrived. The Cuyahoga County Medical Examiner ruled Glenn’s death accidental. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Residential Construction Rise Expected to Continue

    May 10, 2013 —
    Housingwire reports that Fannie Mae has predicted strong increases in housing starts over the last few years, with an expected return to normal by 2016. If this holds true, residential construction will include 2.5 million jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Ahlers & Cressman Presents a Brief History of Liens

    August 20, 2014 —
    Brad Westmoreland on Ahlers & Cressman PLLC’s blog, presented the history of liens in the U.S., going back to 1789. In fact, the lien was created in response to the need of swift and extensive construction in Washington D.C. “Although it had an abundance of land at the time, America was short on labor and capital,” Westmoreland wrote. “Knowing the state of things, builders were hesitant to provide labor and materials without guarantees that owners would be able to pay.” According to the Ahlers & Cressman PLLC blog, Thomas Jefferson solved the issue by urging “the Legislature of Maryland to pass a law giving builders ‘a lien upon newly created values of [their] labors.’ The new law would provide builders with the assurance that contracts would not result in a total loss should the owners fail to pay.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of