BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington hospital construction expert witnessSeattle Washington consulting general contractorSeattle Washington stucco 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


    A Court-Side Seat: “Inholdings” Upheld, a Pecos Bill Come Due and Agency Actions Abound

    Recent Regulatory Activity

    St Louis County Approves Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit

    Florida Appellate Courts Holds Underwriting Manuals are Discoverable in Breach of Contract Case

    Design-Build Contracting for County Road Projects

    A Court-Side Seat: Citizen Suits, “Facility” Management and Some Nuance for Your Hazard Ranking

    Fifth Circuit Concludes Government’s CAA Legal Claims are Time-Barred But Injunctive-Relief Claims are Not

    Insurer's In-House Counsel's Involvement in Coverage Decision Opens Door to Discovery

    New Mandatory Bond Notice Forms in Florida

    Renovate or Demolish Milwaukee’s Historic City Hall?

    Over 70 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 4th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    California Pipeline Disaster Brings More Scandal for PG&E

    How the New Dropped Object Standard Is Changing Jobsite Safety

    S&P Near $1 Billion Mortgage Ratings Settlement With U.S.

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Dispute Waged Over Design of San Francisco Subway Job

    Orchestrating Bias: Arbitrator’s Undisclosed Membership in Philharmonic Group with Pauly Shore’s Attorney Not Grounds to Reverse Award in Real Estate Dispute

    Rebuilding the West: Construction Considerations After the Smoke Clears

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    Construction Defects in Home a Breach of Contract

    Thank You for Seven Years of Election to Super Lawyers

    Architectural Firm Disputes Claim of Fault

    NY Pay-to-Play Charges Dropped Against LPCiminelli Executive As Another Pleads Guilty

    Ohio Condo Owners Sue Builder, Alleging Construction Defects

    The Jersey Shore gets Beach Prisms Designed to Reduce Erosion

    Chinese Drywall Manufacturer Claims Product Was Not for American Market

    And the Winner Is . . . The Right to Repair Act!

    Be Aware of Two New Statutes that Became Effective May 1, 2021

    No Duty to Defend Additional Insured for Construction Defects

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

    Is it time for a summer tune-up?

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (09/21/22) – 3D Printing, Sustainable Design, and the Housing Market Correction

    Georgia Court of Appeals Holds Lay Witness Can Provide Opinion Testimony on the Value of a Property If the Witness Had an Opportunity to Form a Reasoned Opinion

    An Occurrence Under Builder’s Risk Insurance Policy Is Based on the Language in the Policy

    Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Shares Fall on Wind-Down Measure

    Candis Jones Named to Atlanta Magazine’s 2022 “Atlanta 500” List

    Recent Changes in the Law Affecting Construction Defect Litigation

    California Joins the Majority of States in Modifying Its Survival Action Statute To Now Permit Recovery for Pain, Suffering And Disfigurement

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    No Coverage Under Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause

    At Long Last, the Colorado Legislature Gets Serious About Construction Defect Reform – In a Constructive Way

    Construction Costs Must Be Reasonable

    Eighth Circuit Remands to Determine Applicability of Collapse Exclusion

    How to Build a Water-Smart City

    Co-Founding Partner Jason Feld Named Finalist for CLM’s Outside Defense Counsel Professional of the Year

    Megaproject Savings Opportunities

    Retroactive Application of a Construction Subcontract Containing a Merger Clause? Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal Answers in the Affirmative

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    ASHRAE Seeks Comments by May 26 on Draft of Pathogen Mitigation Standard

    Bank Sues over Defective Windows
    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

    Nevada Supreme Court Holds That Insureds Can Use Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Duty to Defend

    February 28, 2022 —
    The recent Nevada Supreme Court ruling in Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company1 benefits insureds seeking to establish an insurer’s duty to defend. As a matter of first impression, the court clarified that insureds have the burden to prove that an exception to a policy exclusion applies in order to trigger the insured’s duty to defend. However, while the policyholder may use extrinsic evidence to establish the insurer’s duty to defend, the insurer may not use extrinsic evidence to deny that duty. The facts of the underlying claim are set in the 2000s when the insured subcontractors worked to build thousands of homes in Nevada. The subcontractors were insured by Zurich American Insurance Company (“Zurich”) during that period. After the homes were complete, the subcontractors switched from Zurich to Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (“Ironshore”). Between 2010 and 2013, homeowners brought claims against the subcontractors alleging that the properties were damaged due to construction defects. The subcontractors tendered the claims to Zurich as the insurer at the time of construction. Zurich then sought defense and indemnification from Ironshore. Ironshore denied coverage under a “continuing and progressive” policy exclusion, claiming that the property damage occurred due to faulty work that predated the Ironshore policy. Notably, an exception to the exclusion applied if “sudden and accidental” property damage occurred within the Ironshore policy period. Given that the underlying lawsuits did not include specific allegations describing when or how the property damage occurred, Ironshore and Zurich disagreed on whether the exception to the exclusion was triggered.. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bethany L. Barrese, Saxe Doernberger & Vita
    Ms. Barrese may be contacted at BBarrese@sdvlaw.com

    Apartment Construction Ominously Nears 25-Year High

    August 27, 2014 —
    If you live in a major U.S. city and look out over the skyline, chances are good you’ll see construction cranes. Lots of them. Only twice in the past 25 years have new apartment buildings been going up as fast as they are right now. That’s not necessarily a good omen. The first time, in February 2000, was right before the dot-com bubble burst. The second time, January 2006, came right before the housing bubble burst. Now we learn that builders broke ground on 423,000 new multifamily units in July, right before … who knows what? Monthly building data released earlier this week by the Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development showed that new home construction overall posted strong gains in July, with the highest number of new home starts in eight months. The comeback largely manifested in an uptick in apartment buildings with five or more units, which saw an almost 50 percent increase in new starts in July over a year earlier. By comparison, starts on single-family homes were up only about 10 percent over the same period. That’s part of the reason that the Northeast, with its large, dense cities, saw the biggest monthly increase, up 44 percent from June. That matches the analysis by Trulia (TRLA) Chief Economist Jed Kolko, who found that among metro areas, Boston and New York are building more than in the past. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Karen Weise, Bloomberg
    Ms. Weise may be contacted at kweise@bloomberg.net

    Manhattan Bargain: Condos for Less Than $3 Million

    February 05, 2015 —
    When Related Cos. began selling condominiums at one of its former rental buildings last month, 50 people showed up in the first two days for an only-in-Manhattan bargain: almost all the homes cost less than $3 million. Carnegie Park, a 1980s-era rental property, was renovated as a condo building where one-bedroom apartments with 690 square feet (64 square meters) start at $765,000. The average price for all units is about $1,300 per square foot -- roughly 30 percent less than the average for a newly built Manhattan condo sold in the fourth quarter, according to appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. Reprinted courtesy of Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg LLP and Heather Perlberg, Bloomberg LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    April 13, 2017 —
    I’ve yet to find reading through an insurance policy on anyone’s “bucket list.” But read them you should. Or have your attorney read through them (wink, wink). Because when you need to tender a claim there’s probably no more important document in the world. In Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. v. Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc., Case No. C078665 (November 29, 2016), a client whose attorney did read the policy, bested the insurer of a policy it issued. Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. In 2006 or 2007, Tidwell Enterprises, Inc. installed a fireplace at a single-family home located in Copperopolis, California. At the time, Tidwell had a general commercial liability policy issued by Financial Pacific Insurance Company, Inc. which expired in March 2010. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@wendel.com

    Court Narrowly Interprets “Faulty Workmanship” Provision

    March 28, 2018 —
    In a recent victory in their home state of Connecticut, Saxe Doernberger & Vita partners, Jeffrey Vita and Theresa Guertin, representing owner-developer 777 Main Street, LLC, overcame a summary judgment motion filed by Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company. The Connecticut Superior court refused to adopt the insurer’s broad interpretation of the “faulty workmanship” exclusion in an all-risk builders’ risk insurance policy. In 2014, 777 Main Street, LLC began renovations on the 27-story former Hartford National Bank building in downtown Hartford, converting the property from an office building to a mixed residential and commercial space. During the renovation, a subcontractor hired to perform the cleaning the concrete façade of the building accidentally over-sprayed the cleaning material onto the property’s windows. The subcontractor’s attempts to clean the overspray further damaged the structural integrity and cosmetic look of the windows. As a result, the owner was forced to replace over 1,800 windows, costing millions. Mr. Vita may be contacted at jjv@sdvlaw.com Ms. Guertin may be contacted at tag@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    November 04, 2019 —
    California’s highest court held yesterday in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., that the state’s insurance notice-prejudice rule is a “fundamental public policy” for the purpose of choice of law analyses. This unanimous ruling, issued in response to certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, confirms and emphasizes California’s common law rule that policyholders who provide “late notice” may proceed with their insurance claim, absent a showing by the insurer of substantial prejudice. The California Supreme Court also extended the prejudice requirement, holding that a first-party insurer must show that it was prejudiced before denying coverage under a policy’s “consent provision,” which typically provides that the policyholder must obtain the insurer’s “consent” before incurring costs and expenses. Reprinted courtesy of Hunton Andrews Kurth attorneys Lorelie S. Masters, Michael S. Levine and Michelle M. Spatz Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Ms. Spatz may be contacted at mspatz@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    February 12, 2013 —
    A West Virginia school board has filed a lawsuit against four companies over the construction of the Lewisburg Elementary School. The main allegation is that Carpenter Reclamation Inc. excavated the site deeper than was called for, which then incurred greater expenses for the subsequent contractors, and further that the liner installed by Carpenter Reclamation was defective. The suit also names Western Surety, which issued a performance bond for Carpenter Reclamation. The school board claims that Carpenter’s failure to fix the problem, required $5,800 in evaluation, review, and testing. Further, the plumbing and lead contractors had additional expenses of $10,587 and $212,645 because of the deeper foundation. The school board has also named these firms, Dougherty Company, Inc. and Swope Construction, in the lawsuit. Ron Mallory, the president of Swope Construction said that the school board’s dispute was “with the site contractor, not with us,” noting that they did corrective work under a change order. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Construction Defect Class Action Lawsuit Alleges National Cover-up of Pipe Defects

    December 10, 2015 —
    Two Miami condominium associations have filed suit “concerning defective fire sprinkler systems and a national cover up over a significant life safety issue in multi-unit condominiums in Florida and across the country.” The attorneys representing the class action lawsuit, Gonzalez, Montoya, Siegfried, Sobel, and Hale, “believe that the problem is nationwide and that monetary damages arising from the claims will exceed $1 billion,” a press release by Colson Hicks Eidson stated. “The 56-count lawsuit filed against a dozen manufacturers, suppliers and distributors seeks compensatory, incidental and consequential damages.” According to CBS Miami, “The suit claims the companies knowingly used [a] chemical that caused cracks and leaks in pipes that affected the water pressure in sprinkler systems.” Plaintiff attorneys claim that the cost to repair each building is estimated at between $50 to $100 million each. Read the full story, Press Release... Read the full story, CBS Miami... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of