BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom home building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington architect expert witnessSeattle Washington building expertSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington defective construction expertSeattle Washington ada design 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


    Are Defense Costs In Addition to Policy Limits?

    The Biggest Thing Keeping Young Homebuyers out of the Market Isn't Student Debt

    Corps, State Agencies Prep for Flood Risks From California Snowmelt Runoff

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    Another (Insurer) Bites The Dust: Virginia District Court Rejects Narrow Reading of Pollution Exclusion

    Texas Supreme Court Rules on Contractual Liability Exclusion in Construction Cases

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

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    When Is Mandatory Arbitration Not Mandatory?

    Excess-Escape Other Insurance Provision Unenforceable to Avoid Defense Cost Contribution Despite Placement in Policy’s Coverage Grant

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    National Engineering and Public Works Roadshow Highlights Low Battery Seawall Restoration Project in Charleston

    Labor Under the Miller Act And Estoppel of Statute of Limitations

    Buy American Under President Trump: What to Know and Where We’re Heading

    Vacation Rentals: Liability of the Owner for Injury Suffered by the Renter

    Conflicts of Laws, Deficiency Actions, and Statutes of Limitations – Oh My!

    Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Supreme Court Says “Stay”

    Thanks for the Super Lawyers Nod for 2019!

    Existence of “Duty” in Negligence Action is Question of Law

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    San Francisco Bucks U.S. Trend With Homeownership Gains

    The Relevance and Reasonableness of Destructive Testing

    San Diego’s NFL Stadium Dream Counts on Munis for Chargers’ Home

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    New Case Law Update: Mountain Valleys, Chevron Deference and a Long-Awaited Resolution on the Sacketts’ Small Lot

    Orion Group Holdings Honored with Leadership in Safety Award

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Out of the Black

    California Supreme Court Shifts Gears on “Reverse CEQA”

    General Contractor Supporting a Subcontractor’s Change Order Only for Owner to Reject the Change

    Bankrupt Canada Contractor Execs Ordered to Repay $26 Million

    The Complex Insurance Coverage Reporter – A Year in Review

    Exponential Acceleration—Interview with Anders Hvid

    Additional Insured Coverage Confirmed

    Colorado Court of Appeals Enforces Limitations of Liability In Pre-Homeowner Protection Act Contracts

    If a Defect Occurs During Construction, Is It an "Occurrence?"

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    Construction Problem Halts Wind Power Park

    Google, Environmentalists and University Push Methane-Leak Detection

    Dave McLain named Barrister’s Best Construction Defects Lawyer for Defendants for 2019

    Developer Sues TVA After It Halts Nuke Site Sale

    California Ranks As Leading State for Green Building in 2022

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    The Choice Is Yours – Or Is It? Anti-Choice-of-Laws Statutes Applicable to Construction Contracts

    California Supreme Court Holds that Requirement of Prejudice for Late Notice Defense is a Fundamental Public Policy of the State for Choice of Law Analysis

    Failure to Comply with Contract Leaves No Additional Insured Coverage

    Boston Developer Sues Contractor Alleging Delays That Cost Millions

    Where-Forum Art Thou? Is the Chosen Forum Akin to No Forum at All?
    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

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    July 01, 2014 —
    New York’s cities and towns can block hydraulic fracturing within their borders, the state’s highest court ruled, dealing a blow to an industry awaiting Governor Andrew Cuomo’s decision on whether to lift a six-year-old statewide moratorium. The case, closely watched by the energy industry, may invigorate local challenges to fracking in other states and convince the industry to stay out of New York even if Cuomo allows drilling. Pennsylvania’s highest court issued a similar ruling last year, striking down portions of a state law limiting localities’ ability to regulate drillers. “This sends a really strong and clear message to the gas companies who have tried to buy their way into the state that these community concerns have to be addressed,” Katherine Nadeau, policy director for Environmental Advocates of New York, an anti-fracking group, said in a phone interview. “This will empower more communities nationwide.” Mr. Dolmetsch may be contacted at cdolmetsch@bloomberg.net; Mr. Klopott may be contacted at fklopott@bloomberg.net; and Mr. Efstathiou Jr. may be contacted at jefstathiou@bloomberg.net Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Chris Dolmetsch, Freeman Klopott and Jim Efstathiou Jr., Bloomberg

    Update: Supreme Court Issues Opinion in West Virginia v. EPA

    August 03, 2022 —
    Takeaways
    • The Supreme Court sided with a coalition of states and coal mining companies constraining EPA’s ability to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants.
    • The Supreme Court’s deployment of the “major questions doctrine” could have far-reaching implications for agencies’ authority to take actions that are politically and economically significant.
    • The Court also announced a broad interpretation of standing, finding that the challengers could bring their suit notwithstanding EPA’s announced nonenforcement of the Clean Power Plan and intent to engage in a rulemaking to replace it.
    Introduction On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in West Virginia v. EPA, invalidating the 2015 Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP). Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court, holding that Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act does not authorize EPA to devise emissions caps based on “generation shifting”—the approach EPA took in the CPP wherein power plants would be required to transition from higher-emitting (e.g., coal) to lower-emitting (e.g., natural-gas) to then even lower-emitting (e.g., wind and solar) electricity production. The Court’s holding that the case was justiciable despite the Biden administration’s stated intent to repeal the Clean Power Plan and engage in a new rulemaking, as well as its deployment of the “major questions doctrine,” is likely to have far-reaching implications for legal challenges to all administrative agency actions. Reprinted courtesy of Anne Idsal Austin, Pillsbury, Shelby L. Dyl, Pillsbury and Sheila McCafferty Harvey, Pillsbury Ms. Austin may be contacted at anne.austin@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Dyl may be contacted at shelby.dyl@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Harvey may be contacted at sheila.harvey@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Lewis Brisbois Ranked Tier 1 Nationally for Insurance Law, Mass Tort/Class Actions Defense, Labor & Employment Litigation, and Environmental Law in 2024 Best Law Firms®

    November 06, 2023 —
    (November 2, 2023) - Lewis Brisbois has been ranked Tier 1 nationally by Best Lawyers for ‘Insurance Law,’ ‘Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants,’ ‘Litigation - Labor and Employment,’ and ‘Environmental Law,’ as well as ranking Tier 1 in an array of practice areas across 25 metro regions in its 2024 edition of Best Law Firms®. In addition to Lewis Brisbois' national ranking, the firm was also ranked Tier 1 in the following regional categories: Akron
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Corporate Law
    • Mergers & Acquisitions Law
    • Tax Law
    • Trusts & Estates Law
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lewis Brisbois

    World’s Biggest Crane Gets to Work at British Nuclear Plant

    October 07, 2019 —
    The world’s largest crane is getting ready to hoist more than 700 of the heaviest pieces of the first new nuclear plant being built in Britain in decades. The machine, affectionately known as “Big Carl” after an executive at Belgian owner Sarens NV, is in place at Electricite de France SA’s 19.6 billion-pound ($24.1 billion) Hinkley Point C project in southwest England. It can carry as much as 5,000 tons, or the same weight as 1,600 cars, in a single lift and arrived on 280 truck loads from Belgium. It has taken about three months to build. Nuclear power makes up about a fifth of Britain’s electricity. Most of those plants are near the end of their lives and will close in the next decade. Replacing them won’t be easy—as the scale of the project shows. Earlier this year, EDF poured 9,000 cubic meters of cement, the biggest single biggest pour of concrete ever recorded in Britain. It was reinforced by 5,000 tons of steel built into a nest 4 meters high that’ll serve as the base of the first new reactor in the U.K. since 1995. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy Hodges, Bloomberg

    Avoid Five Common Fraudulent Schemes Used in Construction

    December 02, 2019 —
    Here’s an attention-getting statistic: A typical case of fraud in the construction industry has a median loss of $227,000, according to the 2018 Report to the Nations issued by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) on occupational or internal fraud. This report further showed that the construction industry’s median loss is approximately $119,000 higher than the average fraud losses across all industries. Construction companies are most at risk for fraud related to corruption (such as bribes and kickbacks), billing related schemes, expense reimbursements, check tampering and equipment or material theft. This brings up three important questions:
    • What are the fraud schemes affecting your company?
    • How can contractors keep their companies from experiencing these types of fraud?
    • What is the profile of fraudster?
    The threat of fraud can never be wholly removed; however, companies should take steps to identify likely fraud schemes they might face. Below are a number of schemes frequently used to defraud construction companies. Reprinted courtesy of Ken Van Bree, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Three Construction Workers Injured at Former GM Plant

    March 26, 2014 —
    In Linden, New Jersey, three construction workers were injured “when they were apparently struck by steel girders while working at the former General Motors site” police told NJ.com. Mayor Richard Gerbounka stated that the “[s]ix struts that would support the deck or ceiling of a warehouse collapsed.” He also mentioned that the city “has been trying to redevelop the former General Motors site for years, but has run into several obstacles, including lawsuits from nearby businesses opposed to retail construction.” Several construction vehicles were “nearly buried under” debris and “[a]t least one I-beam girder and several decking struts—all metal—remain across several heavy construction vehicles,” NJ.com reported. The owner of the vehicles stated “he was told that workers were standing around the vehicles preparing to start their day when high winds knocked down at least one I-beam and several metal decking struts.” In another article published late afternoon on March 26th, NJ.com reported that “high winds” were the cause of the accident. “The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration is investigating the accident and all work at the site has been suspended pending the investigation,” according to the article. “Officials said OSHA inspectors had been at the scene once before, but declined to give details because of a continuing investigation.” Read the full story, NJ.com AM... Read the full story, NJ.com PM... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Viewpoint: Firms Should Begin to Analyze Lessons Learned in 2020

    January 04, 2021 —
    If there’s one phrase that describes 2020, it was not “business as usual.” How AEC firms fared last year depended upon their strategies for navigating an uncertain landscape. While we talk about finding a new normal, company leaders in 2021 will have to think more expansively about what they want that “normal” to look like. Reprinted courtesy of Rich Friedman, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    I’m Sorry Ms. Jackson, I [Sovereign Immunity] am For Real

    June 08, 2020 —
    The Supreme Court of Florida issued its opinion in Florida Highway Patrol v. Jackson, 2020 Fla. LEXIS 108 (Fla. Jan 23, 2020), which answered the following certified question of great public importance: Does rule 9.130 [(A)(3)(C)(XI)] permit an appeal of a non-final order denying immunity if the record shows that the defendant is entitled to immunity as a matter of law but the trial court did not explicitly preclude it as a defense? The Court’s answer to this question was “no.” But this opinion stands for much more than just a negative answer to a certified question. Indeed, this opinion has significant implications upon procedural and substantive areas of construction law, which may affect agents of the state of Florida, including Construction Engineering and Inspection professionals and consultants (“CEI”). Procedurally, the Court recognizes that Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 insufficiently protects the public and governmental interests as “it leaves too great a risk that erroneous denials of operational sovereign immunity will go unreviewed until it is too late.” Id. at * 19. By extension of this risk, the Jackson Court announced that “courts should determine entitlement to sovereign immunity as early as the record permits.” Id. at * 18. In fact, on that basis, courts can address a motion for summary judgment asserting entitlement to sovereign immunity even if there are outstanding disputes as to, say, the existence of a duty of care. Id. at 17-18. Accordingly, and in an effort to remedy the risk of erroneous denials going unreviewed until it is too late, the Court amended Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 to expand appellate review of nonfinal orders denying sovereign immunity. Jackson, 2020 Fla. LEXIS 108 at * 19; In re Amendments to Fla. Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130, No. SC19-1734 (Fla. Jan. 23, 2020). The new form of Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 cements the policy mentioned above because it allows an appeal of a nonfinal order denying a motion for summary judgment due to entitlement to sovereign immunity. Meanwhile, under the old rule, the order was only appealable if the trial court order determined – as a matter of law – that a party was not entitled to sovereign immunity. As such, the new rule focuses on what was argued in the motion as opposed to what was written in the order. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Greggory Jacobs, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Jacobs may be contacted at greggory.jacobs@csklegal.com