BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failureSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington structural concrete expertSeattle Washington fenestration 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


    New California Standards Go into Effect July 1st

    New Nafta Could Settle Canada-U.S. Lumber War, Resolute CEO Says

    Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defect

    Michigan Finds Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Work

    Professional Liability Client Alert: Law Firms Should Consider Hiring Outside Counsel Before Suing Clients For Unpaid Fees

    Congratulations to Walnut Creek Partner Bryan Stofferahn and Associate Jeffrey Schilling for Winning a Motion for Summary Judgment on Behalf of Their Client, a Regional Grocery Store!

    California Supreme Court Allows Claim Under Unfair Competition Statute To Proceed

    Corporate Formalities: A Necessary Part of Business

    Hurricane Handbook: A Policyholder's Guide to Handling Claims during Hurricane Season

    Five-Year Peak for Available Construction Jobs

    Floating Cities May Be One Answer to Rising Sea Levels

    BLOK, a Wired UK Hottest 100 Housing Market Startup, Gets Funding from a Renowned Group of Investors

    Colorado Homebuyers Must be in Privity of Contract with Developer to Assert Breach of Implied Warranty of Suitability

    ConsensusDOCS Updates its Forms

    Woodbridge II and the Nuanced Meaning of “Adverse Use” in Hostile Property Rights Cases in Colorado

    Introducing Nomos LLP!

    Falling Crime Rates Make Dangerous Neighborhoods Safe for Bidding Wars

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (11/03/21)

    Under Colorado House Bill 17-1279, HOA Boards Now Must Get Members’ Informed Consent Before Bringing A Construction Defect Action

    Colorado Introduces Construction Defect Bill for Commuter Communities

    Trial Date Discussed for Las Vegas HOA Takeover Case

    Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion to Reject Claim for Construction Defects Upheld

    Downtown Sacramento Building Riddled with Defects

    Craig Holden Named Top 100 Lawyer by Los Angeles Business Journal

    U.K. Construction Unexpectedly Strengthens for a Second Month

    Thirteen Payne & Fears Attorneys Honored by Best Lawyers

    Electrical Subcontractor Sues over Termination

    Penalty for Failure to Release Expired Liens

    Ten Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    Hurricane Milton Barrels Toward Florida With 180 MPH Winds

    Tidal Lagoon Plans Marine Project to Power Every Home in Wales

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “You Have No Class(ification)”

    Hirers Must Affirmatively Exercise Retained Control to be Liable Under Hooker Exception to Privette Doctrine

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    ACEC Statement on Negotiated Bipartisan Debt Limit Compromise

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Insurer Has No Obligation to Cover Arbitration Award in Construction Defect Case

    Ruling Closes the Loop on Restrictive Additional Insured Endorsement – Reasonable Expectations of Insured Builder Prevails Over Intent of Insurer

    Whose Lease Is It Anyway: Physical Occupancy Not Required in Landlord-Tenant Dispute

    Counterpoint: Washington Supreme Court to Rule on Resulting Losses in Insurance Disputes

    Court Agrees to Stay Coverage Matter While Underlying State Action is Pending

    2017 California Employment Law Update

    Independent Contractor v. Employee. The “ABC Test” Does Not Include a Threshold Hiring Entity Test

    Builder Pipeline in U.S. at Eight-Year High: Under the Hood

    No Duty to Defend Suit That Is Threatened Under Strict Liability Statute

    Federal District Court Finds Coverage Barred Because of Lack of Allegations of Damage During the Policy Period and Because of Late Notice

    Final Furnishing Date is a Question of Fact

    Excessive Corrosion Cause of Ohio State Fair Ride Accident
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Homebuyers Get Break as Loan Rates Defy Fed Tapering: Mortgages

    February 14, 2014 —
    Ashley Underwood is taking advantage of the unexpected drop in mortgage rates by rushing to buy her first home before they go up again. “I’m ready to cancel plans at a moment’s notice to go look at a house,” said Underwood, 27, who lives in Indianapolis, Indiana. “I didn’t expect to see rates falling again, and I want to lock in something before I lose out.” The drop in the last month proved forecasters wrong, said Douglas Duncan, chief economist of Fannie Mae in Washington. After the Federal Reserve announced in December that it would begin tapering purchases of mortgage-backed securities, all the major housing forecasters said rates would jump this quarter. Economists didn’t foresee that investors would react to the Fed’s retreat by moving money from emerging markets into U.S. Treasuries, driving down home-loan rates. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kathleen M. Howley, Bloomberg
    Ms. Howley may be contacted at kmhowley@bloomberg.net

    Blue Gold: Critical Water for Critical Energy Materials

    October 24, 2022 —
    As demand increases for low-carbon technologies to power the energy transition, the acquisition of critical materials—so-called given their integral role in the transition of energy activities—is becoming increasingly important. As described in our previous post, such critical materials include rare earth elements (REE), lithium, nickel and platinum group metals. In short, the transition endeavors to reduce use of one non-renewable resource—fossil fuel—by significantly ramping up our use of other non-renewable resources. While critical material discussions have largely centered on the availability and economic extractability of the minerals themselves, Pillsbury is also counseling on the other resources needed to bring the materials to market at the scales required for our decarbonization goals. Chief among these resources is water. The extraction, processing and manufacture of critical materials into low-carbon technologies all require significant volumes of water. For example, up to 5,000 gallons of water are needed to produce one ton of lithium. Critical materials are often found in arid climates that are already experiencing water stress (such as the “lithium triangle” of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, and copper in Chile), or in areas experiencing conflict and challenges to water development (such as cobalt production in the Democratic Republic of the Congo). In the U.S., development potential resides largely in the water-constrained western and southwestern states, such as Arizona (copper), California (REE), New Mexico (copper, REE), Texas (REE), Utah (magnesium, lithium, platinum, palladium, vanadium, copper), and Wyoming (REE, platinum, titanium, vanadium). Reprinted courtesy of Robert A. James, Pillsbury and Ashleigh Myers, Pillsbury Mr. James may be contacted at rob.james@pillsburylaw.com Ms. Myers may be contacted at ashleigh.myers@pillsburylaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What is a Personal Injury?

    September 03, 2019 —
    Essentially, a personal injury is when an individual is hurt during an accident. Whether driving on the road, walking down the street, or sitting in a chair, accidents happen. When there is an accident, medical treatment may be necessary. Individuals who sustain injuries usually seek compensation for their medical treatment and pain and suffering in the form of a personal injury lawsuit. Personal injury lawsuits can result from a variety of claims including negligence, strict liability, or intentional torts. Yet, for the most part, personal injury lawsuits tend to arise from a claim of negligence. The individual or entity injured in the accident, “Plaintiff”, files a lawsuit against the individual or entity, “Defendant” who allegedly caused harm. Personal injury lawsuits resulting from claims of negligence tend to have two main components: liability and damages. Yet, in order to prevail in a suit for negligence, a Plaintiff must demonstrate the following: (1) a legal duty to use due care, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) a reasonably close, causal connection between that breach and Plaintiff’s resulting injury, and (4) actual loss or damage to Plaintiff. Wylie v. Gresch (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 412. First, a finding of negligence rests upon a determination that the actor has failed to perform a duty of care owed to the injured party. Ronald S. v. County of San Diego (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 887. This means that an individual or entity must act reasonably to avoid injuring others. When an injury occurs, a Plaintiff will generally argue that an individual or entity breached a duty owed to them. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    In South Carolina, Insurer's Denial of Liability Does Not Waive Attorney-Client Privilege for Bad Faith Claim

    October 14, 2019 —
    Determining the scope of discovery can be challenging, particularly when an insurance bad faith claim is involved. Courts often face the difficult decision of weighing the importance of preserving attorney-client privilege with the public policy rationale of protecting an insured against their insurer’s bad faith behavior. The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently recognized this dilemma by rejecting a hardline approach to bad faith discovery disputes and adopting a case-by-case analysis. The case, In re Mt. Hawley Ins. Co.,1 arose out of a construction defect claim. ContraVest Construction Company (“ContraVest”) constructed a development in South Carolina and was later sued for alleged defective construction. ContraVest sought coverage for the lawsuit from its insurers, including Mount Hawley Insurance Company (“Mount Hawley”), which had provided excess commercial liability insurance to ContraVest during the relevant timeframe. Mount Hawley denied the claim, which prompted ContraVest to sue it for bad faith, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Reprinted courtesy of Ashley L. Cooper, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Ms. Cooper may be contacted at alc@sdvlaw.com Ms. Barrese may be contacted at blb@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    An Uncharted Frontier: Nevada First State to Prohibit Defense-Within-Limits Provisions

    July 10, 2023 —
    Nevada recently became the first state to prohibit defense-within-limits provisions in liability insurance policies. Defense-within-limits provisions—resulting in what’s called “eroding” or “wasting” policies—reduce the policy’s applicable limit of insurance by amounts the insurer pays to defend the policyholder against a claim or suit. These provisions are commonly included in errors and omissions (E&O), directors and officers (D&O) and other management liability policies. This is in contrast to other policies, most commonly commercial general liability policies, which provide defense “outside of limits” where defense costs do not reduce the policy’s limit. Reprinted courtesy of Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Andrew S. Koelz, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Mr. Koelz may be contacted at akoelz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Jason Smith and Teddie Arnold Co-Author Updated “United States – Construction” Chapter in 2024 Legal 500: Country Comparative Guides

    May 28, 2024 —
    Jason Smith and Teddie Arnold, partners in Seyfarth’s Washington, DC office, have co-authored an updated “United States – Construction” chapter in the 2024 edition of The Legal 500: Country Comparative Guides. Seyfarth continues to participate as an exclusive contributor for this comprehensive overview of construction-specific laws and regulations in the United States. Topics covered include, but are not limited to, requirements and obligations, permits and licencing, procurement, financing and security, and disputes, as well as insight and opinion on current challenges and opportunities. To access and download a copy of the chapter, click here. Reprinted courtesy of Jason N. Smith, Seyfarth and Edward V. Arnold, Seyfarth Mr. Smith may be contacted at jnsmith@seyfarth.com Mr. Arnold may be contacted at earnold@seyfarth.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When Construction Contracts Go Sideways in Bankruptcy

    February 16, 2017 —
    The contractor on a project files a bankruptcy case. How should the property owner and subcontractors proceed? When a party to a contract files bankruptcy, the other party’s actions are constrained by the bankruptcy code. Types of Bankruptcies The typical bankruptcy case involves a chapter 7 complete liquidation, chapter 13 reorganization for an individual, or a chapter 11 reorganization or liquidation. In a chapter 7 the business ceases to operate and a panel trustee is appointed immediately upon the filing of the case. The chapter 7 trustee’s duties are to liquidate assets for the benefit of creditors and to prosecute litigation that can result in assets for the creditors. In a chapter 13, the individual debtor continues to operate, and there is a trustee, but the trustee’s roll is limited to reviewing the chapter 13 plan and making sure that the plan is performed. In a chapter 11, the debtor retains control of its assets and continues to operate its business until a plan is confirmed. During the chapter 11 period before a plan is approved, the debtor will decide which contracts it wants to assume or reject, all while operating the company and preparing a plan. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tracy Green, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Ms. Green may be contacted at tgreen@wendel.com

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    September 09, 2011 —

    The Supreme Court of North Dakota has ruled in Leno v. K & L Homes, affirming the verdict of the lower court. K & L Homes argued that district court had erred in several ways, including by refusing to instruct the jury on comparative fault, denying a request for inspection, and not allowing a defendant to testify on his observations during jury viewing.

    The Lenos purchased a home constructed by K & L Homes, after which they alleged they found cracks, unevenness, and shifting, which they attributed to improper construction. They claimed negligence on the part of K & L Homes. K & L Homes responded that the Lenos were responsible for damage to the home. The Lenos dropped their negligence claim, arguing breach of contract and implied warranties.

    Before the trial, after the discovery period had passed, K & L Homes requested to inspect the home. This was rejected by the court. Kelly Moldenhauer, the owner of K & L Homes sought to testify about his observations during the jury’s viewing of the house. The court denied this too. The jury found that K & L was in breach of contract and awarded damages to the Lenos.

    The North Dakota Supreme Court noted that K & L Homes gave “warranties that the home had been built according to local building codes and laws, and that the house was fit for its particular purpose as a residence.” The court found that a defective home breached this warranty. Further, the home violated an implied warranty of fitness.

    The district court had denied K & L’s request to inspect the home, as the discovery period had ended and it would not give the Lenos time to do further discovery of their own. At the time of the request, there was only twenty-two days before the trial. The Supreme Court ruled that this was not an abuse of discretion of the part of the district court.

    The Lenos had requested that Moldenhauer’s testimony not be permitted, as it would “have the same effect as if the court had granted K & L Homes’ pretrial request for inspection.” K & L Homes agreed to this in court, replying, “okay.”

    The decision affirms the judgment of the district court and the damages awarded to the Lenos by the jury.

    Read the court’s decision…

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