BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington expert witness structural engineerSeattle Washington civil engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington multi family design expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington construction code 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


    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    2018 California Construction Law Update

    Contractors Must Register with the L&I Prior to Offering or Performing Work, or Risk Having their Breach of Contract Case Dismissed

    Urban Retrofits, Tall Buildings, and Sustainability

    When is a “Notice of Completion” on a California Private Works Construction Project Valid? Why Does It Matter for My Collection Rights?

    State And Local Bid Protests: Sunk Costs and the Meaning of a “Win”

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    Insurance Coverage Litigation Section to Present at Hawaii State Bar Convention

    Construction Picks Up Post-COVID and So Do Claims (and A Construction Lawyer Can Help)

    Non-compliance With Endorsement Means No Indemnity Coverage

    Soldiers Turn Brickies as U.K. Homebuilders Seek Workers

    A Termination for Convenience Is Not a Termination for Default

    Lawyer Claims HOA Scam Mastermind Bribed Politicians

    Caltrans to Speak before California Senate regarding Bay Bridge Expansion

    "Repair Work" Endorsements and Punch List Work

    Understanding the Real Estate and Tax Implications of Florida's Buyer Ban Law

    Construction Contract Basics: Attorney Fee Provisions

    A Reminder to Get Your Contractor’s License in Virginia

    Real Case, Real Lessons: Understanding Builders’ Risk Insurance Limits

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Another Las Vegas Tower at the Center of Construction Defect Claims

    Policy's One Year Suit Limitation Does Not Apply to Challenging the Insurer's Claims Handling

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    San Diego County Considering Updates to Green Building Code

    Construction Employment Rises in Half of the States

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

    Additional Insured Not Covered Where Injury Does Not Arise Out Of Insured's Work

    To Ease Housing Crunch, Theme Parks Are Becoming Homebuilders

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    Heat Stress Deaths Show Europe Isn’t Ready for Climate Change

    New Joint Venture to Develop a New Community in Orange County, California

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Left Out a Key Ingredient!”

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    He Turned Wall Street Offices Into Homes. Now He Vows to Remake New York

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    Changes to Pennsylvania Mechanic’s Lien Code

    April Rise in Construction Spending Not That Much

    Duty To Defend Construction Defect Case Affirmed, Duty to Indemnify Reversed In Part

    Leveraging the 50-State Initiative, Connecticut and Maine Team Secure Full Dismissal of Coverage Claim for Catastrophic Property Loss

    Indemnity Clauses—What do they mean, and what should you be looking for?

    Construction Contract Language and Insurance Coverage Must Be Consistent

    "Is the Defective Work Covered by Insurance?"

    Hunton Insurance Partner, Larry Bracken, Elected to the American College of Coverage Counsel

    New Jersey Federal Court Examines And Applies The “j.(5)” Ongoing Operations Exclusion

    Arizona Purchaser Dwelling Actions Are Subject to a New Construction

    5 Questions about New York's Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act

    Settlement Agreement? It Ain’t Over ‘Til it’s . . . Final, in Writing, Fully Executed, and Admissible

    Terminating the Notice of Commencement (with a Notice of Termination)

    Baby Boomer Housing Deficit Coming?

    A Court-Side Seat: Coal-Fired Limitations, the Search for a Venue Climate Change and New Agency Rules that May or May Not Stick Around
    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

    Business Interruption Claim Granted in Part, Denied in Part

    February 16, 2016 —
    The court granted portions of the business interruption claim, while denying other portions. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Infogroup, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162810 (S. D. Iowa Nov. 30, 2015). Phoenix insured Infogroup's business buildings and personal business property, including data and data processing equipment. In late May 2011, warnings were issued of possible flooding from the Missouri River. On June 1, 2011, Infogroup moved and relocated its business operations and data centers away from the river and did not intend to return to the facilities. On July 19, 2011, Phoenix advanced $500,000 to Infogroup for anticipated claims under the policy. On August 22, 2011, heavy rain left surface water in the parking lot at Infogroup's facilities. Infogroup claimed that it suffered minor property damage during July and August, 2011, including damage to an uninterruptable power source and damage to a server. 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

    Lawmakers Strike Deal on New $38B WRDA

    January 09, 2023 —
    Key Senate and House leaders have reached a bipartisan agreement on a new Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that would authorize more than $37 billion in federal funds for 25 new and five modified Army Corps of Engineers flood and hurricane protection, harbor dredging and other civil works projects across the U.S. Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, Engineering News-Record Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at ichniowskit@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Up in United States

    November 27, 2013 —
    Across the country, construction was up 5% in October, smaller than September’s 13% increase over August, but continuing the trend of escalating construction. The increase in October was largely due to non-residential construction, which was the case in September as well. The projects that drove the increase were described as “large and unusual,” and as such perhaps cannot be counted on to sustain the growth of the construction industry. The $1.7 billion fertilizer plant being built in Iowa cannot be viewed as typical. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court of Appeal Opens Pandora’s Box on Definition of “Contractor” for Forum Selection Clauses

    October 02, 2015 —
    In Vita Planning and Landscape Architecture, Inc. v. HKS Architects, Inc. (“Vita Planning”), the First Appellate District held California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 410.42 (“Section 410.42”) which prohibits an out-of-state contractor from requiring a California subcontractor to litigate disputes in a state other than California, applies not only to traditional “contractors” and “subcontractors” but also to design professionals and architects. In Vita Planning, a dispute arose when HKS, a Texas based architectural firm, refused to pay Vita Planning and Architecture (“Vita”), a landscape design firm, for work on a luxury hotel in Mammoth Lakes, California (“Project”). HKS contended it was not required to pay Vita until it was paid by the owner of the Project, and any claims regarding the work needed to be filed in Texas pursuant to a forum selection clause contained in a Prime Contract between HKS and the Owner. The forum clause was “incorporated by reference” into an unsigned “standard form” agreement between HKS and Vita. Despite the forum clause, Vita filed a Complaint against HKS in Marin County Superior Court. Reprinted courtesy of Abigail E. Lighthart, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and David A. Harris, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Harris may be contacted at dharris@hbblaw.com Ms. Lighthart may be contacted at alighthart@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    September 30, 2011 —

    The California Court of Appeals has ruled in the case of Allied Framers, Inc. v. Golden Bear Insurance Company. Allied had been sued in a construction defect case and its primary insurer had become insolvent. Coverage for Allied’s defense was paid for by the California Insurance Guarantee Association through June 8, 2006. When warned that CIGA’s involvement was ending, Allied notified Golden Bear, which declined to provide coverage.

    In the matters that followed, Golden Bear claimed that Allied had not exhausted its $1 million in primary insurance. Allied then showed that $1 million had already been paid out in the case. A few months thereafter, Golden Bear offered a $500,000 settlement on behalf of Allied which was rejected. Thereafter, Golden Bear hired new counsel to defend Allied. Golden Bear received, but allegedly did not pay, invoices Allied sent from their former counsel. Golden Bear finally settled the construction defect case for $2 million.

    Allied’s original counsel sued Allied for payment. Golden Bear declined coverage. Allied then claimed that Golden Bear liable on several counts, arising from its failure to settle the construction defect action earlier than it did and its failure to pay Allied’s counsel. Golden Bear demurred, arguing that Allied had now exhausted is coverage with the $2 million settlement. The lower court sustained Golden Bear’s demurrer, dismissing Allied’s complaints.

    The appeal court reviewed Allied’s seven complaints and sustained most of them. However, the court did reverse the trial court’s order in regard to Allied’s complaint that Golden Bear breached an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The appeals court was not convinced that Golden Bear properly evaluated the settlement demand in the underlying construction defect case. The court found three other ways in which Golden Bear’s actions might show bad faith, in refusing to pay defense fees “after promising [Allied] such costs would be paid in full,” “failing to advise Allied about ‘actual or potential negative consequences of agreeing to the proposed settlement,’” and that their choice of counsel “failed to protect [Allied’s] interests in the negotiation.”

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    November 15, 2017 —
    The European Union (“EU”) has enacted a strict, comprehensive framework of security regulations aimed to protect its citizens. These regulations, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), provide a blueprint for a combination of required legal, technological and work habits within an organization. Although this is an EU regulation, the new laws will apply to any organization within or outside the EU that collects or processes data of EU citizens. Therefore, U.S. companies must analyze their data and processes to determine whether compliance with the GDPR is necessary. A quickly-approaching deadline of May 25, 2018 must be met to avoid massive fines. What is the GDPR? In order to address the creation of social networking sites, cloud computing, and location-based services, the EU set in motion a process to implement a vigorous set of rules to ensure the right to personal data protection for all European citizens. In April 2016 the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission adopted a new GDPR, which will take affect on May 25, 2018. This GDPR will streamline cooperation between the data protection authorities on personal data issues allowing companies to deal with one authority - not each of the 28 EU member states. This will allow for quicker decisions by the data protection authorities and greatly reduce the red tape in both compliance and enforcement under the GDPR. This will also create a level playing field by forcing non-EU companies to comply with the same strict regulations - regardless of whether or not the company is established in the EU. Territorial scope of the GDPR The GDPR applies directly to the processing of personal data in the context of the activities of an establishment of a controller or a processor in the EU - regardless of whether the processing takes place in the EU. Additionally, there are specific provisions under the GDPR that apply to non-EU companies if their processing activities relate to (a) the offering of goods or services (irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required) or (b) monitoring the behavior of individuals within the EU. Therefore, all companies must determine whether they process or monitor information of EU citizens. If a company falls within one of these categories, compliance with the GDPR is mandatory. What happens if a company fails to comply with the GDPR? Failure to comply with the GDPR could subject a company to crushing administrative fines. The supervisory authority has the power to impose administrative fines under the GDPR. The following violations and breaches would subject a company to administrative fines:
    • Not adhering to the core principles of processing personal data,
    • Breach of notification to EU citizens by controllers and processors,
    • Wrongful transfer of personal data to non-EU countries,
    • Breach of obligations regarding certification,
    • Ignoring the mandates asserted by the supervisory authority,
    • Breach by those responsible for impact assessment, and
    • Wrongful processing of employee data.
    The extent of the violation and type of personal data involved will dictate the severity of the administrative fines imposed on a company. For example, under the GDPR, a company could be subject to administrative fines up to 20,000,000 EUR, or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual revenue of the preceding financial year. Obviously, these fines would be financially crippling to any company. Preparing for May 25, 2018 The May 25, 2018 deadline is fast approaching and preparing for full compliance with the GDPR is paramount. Simple steps should be taken to ensure compliance including to: (1) Review and analyze data repositories for sensitive data, (2) Perform an analysis/accounting of procedure for data collection, and (3) Create an oversite committee dedicated to data activities and compliance. Most importantly, however, is to determine whether compliance with the GDPR is necessary, and strictly follow the requirements of the GDPR to protect from potentially massive fines. Jeffrey M. Dennis currently serves as Newmeyer & Dillion’s Managing Partner and as a business leader, advises his clients on cybersecurity related issues, introducing contractual and insurance opportunities to lessen their risk. You can reach Jeff at jeff.dennis@ndlf.com. Ivo Daniele is a seasoned associate in Newmeyer & Dillion’s Walnut Creek office. His practice includes representing private and public companies with both their transactional and litigation needs. You can reach Ivo at ivo.daniele@ndlf.com. About Newmeyer & Dillion For more than 30 years, Newmeyer & Dillion has delivered creative and outstanding legal solutions and trial results for a wide array of clients. With over 70 attorneys practicing in all aspects of business, employment, real estate, construction and insurance law, Newmeyer & Dillion delivers legal services tailored to meet each client’s needs. Headquartered in Newport Beach, California, with offices in Walnut Creek, California and Las Vegas, Nevada, Newmeyer & Dillion attorneys are recognized by The Best Lawyers in America©, and Super Lawyers as top tier and some of the best lawyers in California, and have been given Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review's AV Preeminent® highest rating. For additional information, call 949-854-7000 or visit www.ndlf.com. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Does Your U.S. Company Pull Data From European Citizens? Fall In Line With GDPR by May 2018 or Suffer Substantial Fines

    French Laundry Spices Up COVID-19 Business Interruption Debate

    April 20, 2020 —
    On March 26, 2020, Michelin-rated Napa Valley restaurants, French Laundry and Bouchon Bistro, and their celebrity chef, Thomas Keller, filed the second known coronavirus-related declaratory judgment (DJ) lawsuit by a restaurant. The restaurants filed their DJ against Hartford Fire Insurance Company just seven days after Napa County issued a Shelter at Home Order.1 Chef Keller’s suit comes on the heels of the first such suit by a restaurant seeking to recover business income losses, filed by iconic New Orleans French Quarter restaurant Oceana Grill2 on March 17, just four days after the Louisiana governor issued an order prohibiting gatherings of more than 250 people. As local governments seek to protect their citizens and prevent an onslaught of cases in area hospitals, they are issuing various “stay home,” “shelter at home,” and similar orders to force social distancing and to help flatten the curve of the growth in COVID-19 cases. Restaurants nationwide are especially hard hit by these orders, as many of these orders contain size limitations on gatherings, which have required that restaurants and bars limit capacity (as in the March 13th Louisiana order). Other such orders require non-essential businesses to “cease all activities in the County” (as in the Napa County Shelter at Home order). The Napa County order does not exempt restaurants as “essential businesses,” except when providing food for take-out or delivery. Other orders, still, directly address restaurants and require them to cease allowing public consumption of food and beverages (as in the subsequent, March 17th Louisiana order). Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Melanie A. McDonald, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Ms. McDonald may be contacted at mam@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SE 2050 Is In Quixotic Pursuit of Eliminating Embodied Carbon in Building Structures

    January 23, 2023 —
    Walking to work one November morning, structural engineer Chris Jeseritz was buoyed by a Nelson Mandela quotation on a digital sign on the side of a Seattle office tower: “A winner is a dreamer who never gives up.” Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post - Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at postn@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of