BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington fenestration expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnesses
    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


    Potential Extension of the Statutes of Limitation and Repose for Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Environmental Roundup – April 2019

    Florida Court Puts the Claim of Landlord’s Insurer In The No-Fly Zone

    Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co.

    Blue Gold: Critical Water for Critical Energy Materials

    Naughty or Nice. Contractor Receives Two Lumps of Coal in Administrative Dispute

    Best Practices in Construction– What are Yours?

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

    AI-Powered Construction Optioneering Today

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    Intentional Mining Neighbor's Property is Not an Occurrence

    Industry Standard and Sole Negligence Defenses Can’t Fix a Defect

    Serving the 558 Notice of Construction Defect Letter in Light of the Statute of Repose

    Surety Trends to Keep an Eye on in the Construction Industry

    Ben L. Aderholt Joins Coats Rose Construction Litigation Group

    JAMS Announces Updated Construction Rules

    Condo Association Settles with Pulte Homes over Construction Defect Claims

    Prompt Payment More Likely on Residential Construction Jobs Than Commercial or Public Jobs

    No Occurrence Found for Damage to Home Caused by Settling

    Do You Have an Innovation Strategy?

    Californians Swarm Few Listings Cuts to Affordable Homes

    Before and After the Storm: Know Your Insurance Rights, Coverages and Obligations

    Homeowner’s Claims Defeated Because “Gravamen” of Complaint was Fraud, not Breach of Contract

    Online Meetings & Privacy in Today’s WFH Environment

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2022 Illinois Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars

    I.M. Pei, Architect Who Designed Louvre Pyramid, Dies at 102

    Vinci Will Build $580M Calgary Project To Avoid Epic Flood Repeat

    Coverage Article - To Settle or Not To Settle?

    Contracts and Fraud Don’t Mix (Even for Lawyers!)

    EEOC Sues Whiting-Turner Over Black Worker Treatment at Tennessee Google Project

    Effective Allocation of Damages for Federal Contract Claims

    Congress Passes, President Signs Sweeping Energy Measure In Spend Bill

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    Europe’s Satellites Could Help Catch the Next Climate Disaster

    Create a Culture of Safety to Improve Labor Recruitment Efforts

    Production of Pre-Denial Claim File Compelled

    Documenting Contract Changes in Construction

    Construction Contract Provisions that Should Pique Your Interest

    Construction Goes Green in Orange County

    Insured's Lack of Knowledge of Tenant's Growing Marijuana Means Coverage Afforded for Fire Loss

    Be Careful with Continuous Breach and Statute of Limitations

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Home Building on the Upswing in Bakersfield

    Protecting Your Business From Liability Claims Stemming From COVID-19 Exposure

    Quick Note: Expert Testimony – Back to the Frye Test in Florida

    Building Recovery Comes to Las Vegas, Provides Relief

    Water Backup Payment Satisfies Insurer's Obligation to Cover for Rain Damage
    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

    Erasing Any Doubt: Arizona FED Actions Do Not Accrue Until Formal Demand for Possession is Tendered

    July 13, 2017 —
    Clearing up any lingering confusion, in Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC v. Woods, 767 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 4 (June 22, 2017), the Arizona Court of Appeals confirmed that residential forcible entry and detainer actions in Arizona accrue for statute of limitations purposes when a party entitled to possession makes a formal demand for return of possession not when the party could have made a demand for return of possession. In Carrington, the borrowers (the Woodses) remained in property that they had acquired in 2008 but then lost to foreclosure several years later. The original lender obtained title to the property at a trustee’s sale on February 16, 2010, but did not take any action to remove the Woodses at that time. Title to the property was then transferred through a series of transactions over the next six years. Ultimately, Carrington acquired the title and, in 2016, sent a formal “Notice to Vacate” the premises to the Woodses. After the Woodses failed to timely vacate pursuant to the demand, Carrington initiated an FED action to evict them from the property. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bob Henry, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Henry may be contacted at bhenry@swlaw.com

    Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine Bars Coverage for Collapse of Building

    July 31, 2013 —
    The court rejected the insured's argument that there was coverage for the collapse of a building caused by water leakage (a covered peril) and landslide (an uncovered peril). Stor/Gard, Inc. v. Strathmore Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. LEXIS App. 11015 (1st Cir. May 31, 2013). A severe rain storm caused soil to slide down a hill and over a retaining wall, thereby damaging a building owned by the insured. Investigators hired by Strathmore Insurance Company determined that rain had soaked into the soil, causing the landslide. Although the investigators found some water leakage, they determined the leakage was not a cause or contributing factor, and was negligible compared to the rain amount. The insured's policy with Strathmore was an all-risk policy. Loss caused by a landslide was excluded. Further, loss caused by collapse was excluded from coverage except as set forth in the policy's "additional coverage for collapse" section. This section provided coverage for a collapse caused by water damage or a leakage of water. Another exclusion barred coverage for loss caused by weather conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Ruling Dealing with Constructive Changes, Constructive Suspension, and the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    January 22, 2024 —
    A dispute pending in the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) dealt with interesting legal issues on a motion to dismiss. See Appeals of McCarthy Hitt-Next NGA West JV, ASBCA No. 63571, 2023 WL 9179193 (ASBCA 2023). The dispute involves a contractor passing through subcontractor claims due to impacts caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the government’s response to the pandemic. More particularly, the claim centers on the premise that the government “failed to work with [the contractor] in good faith to develop a collaborative and cooperative approach to manage and mitigate the impacts and delays arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.” See Appeals of McCarthy Hitt. The contractor (again, submitting pass through claims from subcontractors) claimed: (a) constructive changes to the contract entitling it to an equitable adjustment under the Changes clause of Federal Acquisition Regulation (F.A.R.) 52.243-4; (b) construction suspensions of the contractor’s work entitling it to an equitable adjustment under the Suspensions of Work clause of F.A.R. 52-242-14; and (c) the government breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Each of these legal issues and theories will be discussed below because they are need-to-know legal issues. Keep these legal issues in mind, and the ASBCA’s ruling on the motion to dismiss as its analysis may demonstrate fruitful in other applications. 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

    Texas LGI Homes Goes After First-Time Homeowners

    May 13, 2014 —
    According to Big Builder, while many consumers have “gone to rentals…as the homeownership rate fell,” that hasn’t stopped Texas-based builder LGI Homes from marketing to the entry-level buyer: “We do not believe that we’re becoming a renter society,” Eric Lipar, LGI CEO told Big Builder. “We believe there is a need and a desire for homeownership.” “The real growth will be powered by an aggressive sales and marketing operation that aims to pull renters out of their apartments (or single-family rentals) and into LGI homes,” reported Big Builder. “So far this pitch has worked in Texas (Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin), in addition to Phoenix and Tampa, Fla.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New ConsensusDocs 242 Design Professional Change Order Form Helps Facilitate Compensation for Changes in Design Services

    November 05, 2024 —
    ConsensusDocs is publishing a new ConsensusDocs 242 Change in Services and Compensation, a change order for design services by a design professional. In the design and construction industry, one thing is certain – change. The work scope included in basic design services an architect or engineer provides occurs somewhat regularly. Previously, ConsensusDocs did not have a standard contract document for changing design professionals’ prices. As a result of user feedback, the ConsensusDocs Contract Content Advisory Council (CCAC) drafted this new architect/engineer change order. The CCAC unanimously approved the new contract document and publication is set for October 14, 2024. The document will be available for most ConsensusDocs subscribers. The full, owner, design-professional, and short-form subscription packages will include the document. A subscription package can be purchased through ConsensusDocs here. The design professional change order helps owners of construction projects keep track of additional services their design professionals perform. The design professional must provide itemized labor breakdowns for each invoice. The new ConsensusDocs 242 has options for compensation to be actual hours at the billing rate or a lump sum. The new contract document form also has a table for the remaining project deliverables and their respective due dates. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian Perlberg, ConsensusDocs Coalition
    Mr. Perlberg may be contacted at bperlberg@ConsensusDocs.org

    L.A. Makes $4.5 Billion Bet on Olympics After Boston Backs Out

    August 26, 2015 —
    Los Angeles’s dreams of hosting the Olympic Games for a third time could get a boost from the City Council this week, even as officials try to assure taxpayers that they won’t be forced to bail out a botched effort. The council is expected to vote Wednesday on giving Mayor Eric Garcetti power to negotiate with the U.S. Olympic Committee to bring the 2024 games to Los Angeles and require the city to pay for cost overruns. Los Angeles emerged as the U.S. contender for the games after Boston withdrew from consideration in July. Opponents there warned that taxpayers were on the hook if the nearly month-long sporting event lost money. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James Nash, Bloomberg

    Retaining Wall Contractor Not Responsible for Building Damage

    July 20, 2011 —

    The Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled on July 8 in the case of Rollander Enterprises, Inc. v. H.C. Nutting Co. Judge Baily wrote the opinion affirming the decision of the trial court.

    The case involved an unfinished condominium complex, the Slopes of Greendale, in Greendale, Indiana. Rollander is a real estate development company incorporated in Ohio. One of the issues in the case was whether the case should be settled in the Indiana courts or be tried in Ohio. The project was owned by a special purpose entity limited liability corporation incorporated in Indiana.

    Rollander hired Nutting to determine the geological composition of the site. Nutting’s report described the site as “a medium plastic clay containing pieces of shale and limestone.” The court summarized this as corresponding with “slope instability and landslides.” Rollander then hired Nutting to design the retaining walls, which were constructed by Scherziner Drilling.

    After cracking was discovered on State Route 1, the walls were discovered to be inadequate. More dirt was brought in and a system of tie-backs was designed to anchor the walls. Not only were the tie-backs unsightly, local officials would not approve the complex for occupancy. Further, the failure of the wall below one building lead to damage of that building.

    The court concluded that since almost all events occurred in Indiana, they rejected Rollander’s contention that the case should be tried in Ohio. Further, the court notes “the last event making Nutting potentially liable on both claims was an injury that occurred in Indiana and consequently, under the lex loci delicti analysis, Indiana law applies.”

    Nor did the court find that Nutting was responsible for the damage to the rest of the project, citing an Indiana Supreme Court ruling, that “there is no liability in tort to the owner of a major construction project for pure economic loss caused unintentionally by contractors, subcontractors, engineers, design professionals, or others engaged in the project with whom the project owner, whether or not technically in privity of contract, is connected through a network or chain of contracts.”

    The court concluded:

    Because Rollander was in contractual privity with Nutting, and Indy was connected to Nutting through a chain of contracts and no exception applies, the economic loss rule precludes their recovery in tort. Damage to Building B was not damage to "other property," and the negligent misrepresentation exception to the economic loss rule is inapplicable on these facts. The trial court therefore did not abuse its discretion by entering judgment on the evidence in favor of Nutting on the Appellants' negligence and negligent misrepresentation claims.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    White House Hopefuls Make Pitches to Construction Unions

    May 20, 2019 —
    As the 2020 presidential election draws nearer, many Democratic hopefuls are beginning to seek construction unions’ support. Eight declared candidates made their pitches to members of the North America’s Building Trades Unions at the group’s legislative conference April 9-10 in Washington, D.C. Several promised a major infrastructure package of $1 trillion or more, which aligns with the trades’ legislative agenda. But many seeking endorsement will wrestle with balancing calls for a green economy and unions’ demand for traditional oil and gas sector jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bruce Buckley, ENR
    ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com