BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert testimonySeattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington construction expertsSeattle Washington building envelope 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


    Contractor Sues Yelp Reviewer for Defamation

    Yet ANOTHER Reminder to Always Respond

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 7: How to Successfully Prepare, Submit and Negotiate the Claim

    Revamp to Nationwide Permits Impacting Oil and Gas Pipeline, Utility and Telecom Line Work

    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara LLP Attorneys to Speak at the 2016 National Construction Claims Conference

    Jury Trials and Mediation in Philadelphia County: Virtually in Person

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    IoT: Take Guessing Out of the Concrete Drying Process

    The Practical Distinction Between Anticipatory Breach and Repudiation and How to Deal with Both on Construction Projects

    Wait, You Want An HOA?! Restricting Implied Common-Interest Communities

    Five Years of Great Legal Blogging at Insurance Law Hawaii

    Mark Van Wonterghem To Serve as Senior Forensic Consultant in the Sacramento Offices of Bert L. Howe & Associates, Inc.

    California Makes Big Changes to the Discovery Act

    NTSB Outlines Pittsburgh Bridge Structure Specifics, Finding Collapse Cause Will Take Months

    When is Construction Put to Its “Intended Use”?

    Extrinsic Evidence, or Eight Corners? Texas Court Sheds Light on Determining the Duty to Defend

    Tax Increase Pumps $52 Billion Into California Construction

    Guardrail Maker Defrauded U.S. of $175 Million and Created Hazard, Jury Says

    New Case Law Alert: Licensed General Contractors Cannot Sue Owners to Recover Funds for Work Performed by An Unlicensed Subcontractor

    ABC Safety Report: Construction Companies Can Be Nearly 6 Times Safer Than the Industry Average Through Best Practices

    Contingent Business Interruption Claim Denied

    The Indemnification Limitation in Section 725.06 does not apply to Utility Horizontal-Type Projects

    U.K. Construction Growth Unexpectedly Accelerated in January

    Does a No-Damage-for-Delay Clause Also Preclude Acceleration Damages?

    School for Building Trades Helps Fill Need for Skilled Workers

    Eliminating Waste in Construction – An Interview with Turner Burton

    Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Professional Services Exclusion in Homeowners Policy

    Towards Paperless Construction: PaperLight

    California Homeowners Can Release Future, Unknown Claims Against Builders

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/16/24) – Algorithms Affect the Rental Market, Robots Aim to Lower Construction Costs, and Gen Z Struggle to Find Their Own Space

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

    Classify Workers Properly to Avoid Expensive Penalties

    Why You Make A Better Wall Than A Window: Why Policyholders Can Rest Assured That Insurers Should Pay Legal Bills for Claims with Potential Coverage

    Don’t Spoil Me: Oklahoma District Court Rules Against Spoliation Sanctions

    Third Circuit Vacates Judgment for Insurer on Alleged Construction Defect Claim

    Smart Contracts Poised to Impact the Future of Construction

    Indemnity Payment to Insured Satisfies SIR

    Dave McLain included in the 2023 edition of The Best Lawyers in America

    Endorsements Do Not Exclude Coverage for Wrongful Death Claim

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

    Pool Contractor’s Assets Frozen over Construction Claims

    When is Mediation Appropriate for Your Construction Case?

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Texas Public Procurements: What Changed on September 1, 2017? a/k/a: When is the Use of E-Verify Required?

    A Win for Policyholders: California Court of Appeals Applies Vertical Exhaustion for Continuous Injury Claims

    An Overview of the New EPA HVAC Refrigerant Regulations and Its Implications for the Construction Industry

    Plaintiff’s Mere Presence in Area Where Asbestos is Present Insufficient to Establish Bystander Exposure

    Major Changes in Commercial Construction Since 2009

    Some Construction Contract Basics- Necessities and Pitfalls

    Warranty Reform Legislation for Condominiums – Unfair Practices used by Developers and Builders to avoid Warranty Responsibility for Construction Defects in Newly Constructed Condominiums
    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

    California Fire Lawyers File Suit Against PG&E on Behalf of More Than 50 Wildfire Victims

    November 15, 2017 —
    Digital Journal reports that the California fire lawyers are comprised of four law firms, Baron & Budd, Singleton Law Firm, Dixon Diab & Chambers LLP, and Thornes Bartolotta McGuire. These firms filed suit against PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company) on October 27th alleging that the brutal wildfires that swept through Northern California started when electrical infrastructure encountered vegetation. According to Digital Journal, more than 50 plaintiffs are being represented in this case who endured damages including “wrongful death, personal injuries, damage to or destruction of property, loss of cherished possessions, medical bills, evacuation expenses and lost wages.” John Fiske, an attorney at Baron & Budd stated, “through our team’s investigation to date, we believe that PG&E may have played a role in causing these fires.” Holding PG&E accountable for the 40 people killed, 8,400 structures destroyed, and 210,000 acres burned is their goal. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Thank You Once Again for the Legal Elite Election for 2022

    December 18, 2022 —
    Thank you once again to those in the Virginia legal community who elected me to the Virginia Business Legal Elite in the Construction Law category for the 16th consecutive year. The 16 consecutive years of election to the Legal Elite in the Construction Category span my time as a solo construction attorney. The fact that you all have continued to elect “100%” of the lawyers at The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC for the last 12 years is most gratifying and only confirms that my decision to “go solo” over 12 years ago was a good one. To be included in this list of top construction attorneys is both humbling and gratifying. For the complete list of the Virginia construction lawyers that were elected along with me, see the 2022 Virginia Business Legal Elite in Construction Law. So without further ado, thank you to all of you who voted for me. I truly appreciate your continued confidence and support of my construction law practice. Your yearly votes always prod me to learn and continually improve to meet your expectations and keep my practice at this high level. I also couldn’t do this without the great support from friends and family (not to mention clients), so my gratitude goes out to these great folks. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    New York's Highest Court Says Asbestos Causation Requires Evidence Of Sufficient Exposure To Sustain Liability

    May 10, 2022 —
    On April 26, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals described that in toxic tort cases a plaintiff can only establish liability-creating causation for an adverse health effect with “expert testimony based on generally accepted methodologies.” See Francis Nemeth v. Brenntag North America (N.Y. Apr. 26, 2022). The suit involved alleged asbestos exposure from talc. The plaintiff alleged liability for talc contaminated with asbestos that was ultimately used in a commercial talcum powder, Desert Flower, which the decedent applied daily from 1960 to 1971. At trial, the plaintiff proffered two expert witnesses, a geologist, Sean Fitzgerald, who testified about the “glove box test” and a doctor of internal medicine, Dr. Jacqueline Moline. Fitzgerald’s glove box test consisted of agitating a sample of Desert Flower in a Plexiglas chamber. Fitzgerald concluded that the asbestos fibers in the sample of Desert Flower were “significantly releasable” and that the decedent was exposed to thousands to trillions of fibers through repeated use. Dr. Moline concluded Desert Flower was “a substantial contributing factor” to the decedent’s peritoneal mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. Reprinted courtesy of Rafael Vergara, White and Williams and Jhonattan N. Gonzalez, White and Williams Mr. Vergara may be contacted at vergarar@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at gonzalezj@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    November 24, 2019 —
    An exculpatory clause in a contract is a clause aimed at relieving another party from certain liability. A disclaimer and insulation from liability. Obviously, if you are the party relieving the other party from liability, you want to consider this risk including the potential enforceability of this risk if something goes wrong. If you are the party asking for the insulation from liability, you do not want to create an exculpatory provision that disclaims and insulates you of all liability arising from the contract as it may create an illusory effect – that the agreement is nothing but a naked promise on your end because your promise is fully disclaimed and you are insulated from liability if you break your promise. This could result in an unenforceable contract. The validity of such an exculpatory clause was at-issue in Pier 1 Cruise Experts v. Revelex Corp., 2019 WL 3024618 (11thCir. 2019). Although not a construction dispute, the exculpatory clause in this case was with two fairly sophisticated parties and expressly insulated one of the contracting parties from “any…damages regardless of kind or type…whether in contract, tort (including negligence), or otherwise.” Pier 1 Cruise Experts, 2019 WL at *7. This is a powerful exculpatory clause because it could be broadly construed to insulate that party from its own breaches of the contract. In Florida:
    [A]n exculpatory clause is enforceable so long as (1) the contracting parties have equal bargaining power and (2) the clause’s provisions are clear and unambiguous. With respect to the latter requirement, ‘the intention to be relieved from liability [must be] made clear and unequivocal and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away.” In the same vein, exculpatory clauses are ‘strictly construed against the party seeking to be relieved of liability.’ Pier 1 Cruise Experts, 2019 WL at *7 (internal citations omitted).
    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

    Are You Taking Full Advantage of Available Reimbursements for Assisting Injured Workers?

    January 08, 2019 —
    Workplace injuries are an increasingly expensive cost of doing business. While every business does their best to avoid these injuries, even the most prepared employers must deal with them on occasion. The costs associated with these injuries—increased worker’s compensation premiums, decreased productivity, hiring temporary employees, and the loss of experienced workers—can be mitigated by shrewd employers taking full advantage of available assistance programs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jonathan Schirmer, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Schirmer may be contacted at jonathan.schirmer@acslawyers.com

    First Suit to Enforce Business-Interruption Coverage Filed

    April 20, 2020 —
    On Monday, Oceana Grill, a restaurant in New Orleans, Louisiana, became the first to file a lawsuit over coverage for COVID-19 business interruption losses. The lawsuit, styled Cajun Conti, LLC, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, et al. (La. Dist. Court, Orleans Parish), seeks a declaratory judgment that an “all risks” property insurance policy issued by Lloyd’s of London must cover losses resulting from the closure of the restaurant following an order by the Governor of Louisiana restricting public gatherings and the Mayor of New Orleans’ order closing restaurants. The Lloyds’ policy, like most first-party property insurance policies, affords coverage for business- interruption losses and contains an “extension of coverage in the event of the businesses closure by order of Civil Authority.” Specifically, the lawsuit seeks a declaration that “the policy provides coverage to plaintiffs for any future civil authority shutdowns of restaurants in the New Orleans area due to physical loss from Coronavirus contamination and that the policy provides business income coverage in the event that the coronavirus has contaminated the insured premises.” Furthermore, according to the complaint, “[t]he policy does not provide any exclusion due to losses, business or property, from a virus or global pandemic.” As the complaint implies, an important issue will be whether the novel coronavirus constitutes the requisite “direct physical loss or damage” under the policy. Understanding COVID-19, its manner of transmission and its ability to live beyond a host organism helps support a conclusion that COVID-19 does indeed amount to the required direct physical loss or damage. Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    While You Were Getting Worked Up Over Oil Prices, This Just Happened to Solar

    October 29, 2014 —
    Every time fossil fuels get cheaper, people lose interest in solar deployment. That may be about to change. After years of struggling against cheap natural gas prices and variable subsidies, solar electricity is on track to be as cheap or cheaper than average electricity-bill prices in 47 U.S. states -- in 2016, according to a Deutsche Bank report published this week. That’s assuming the U.S. maintains its 30 percent tax credit on system costs, which is set to expire that same year. Even if the tax credit drops to 10 percent, solar will soon reach price parity with conventional electricity in well over half the nation: 36 states. Gone are the days when solar panels were an exotic plaything of Earth-loving rich people. Solar is becoming mainstream, and prices will continue to drop as the technology improves and financing becomes more affordable, according to the report. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Randall, Bloomberg
    Mr. Randall may be contacted at trandall6@bloomberg.net

    Design Firm Settles over Construction Defect Claim

    July 31, 2013 —
    A Pennsylvania township has announced that it has reached a settlement with the architectural firm that designed its administration building. Cee Jay Frederick Associates will be paying than $1.05 million to settle claims of defects in the design of the building. West Whiteland’s administration building was completed in July 2007. The first leaks were noticed in November and December 2008. In response, the township stopped payments to the contractor, Magnum, Inc. Magnum sued, claiming that their work was not to blame for the leaks. Magnum joined the township in suing the design firm. Although Cee Jay Frederick Associates will be paying the township to settle the claim, West Whiteland will be paying $75,000 of that back to the firm to settle outstanding bills that had been withheld during litigation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of