BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington stucco expert witnessSeattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington forensic architectSeattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington architecture expert witnessSeattle Washington multi family design expert witnessSeattle Washington hospital construction 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


    Los Angeles Delays ‘Mansion Tax’ Spending Amid Legal Fight

    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    Lewis Brisbois Listed as Top 10 Firm of 2022 on Leopard Solutions Law Firm Index

    Edgewater Plans to Sue Over Pollution During Veterans Field Rehab

    Caveat Emptor (“Buyer Beware!”) Exceptions

    Georgia Passes Solar CUVA Bill

    Congratulations to Partner John O’Meara for Being Named as One of America’s Top 100 Civil Defense Litigators for Three Consecutive Years!

    Joint Venture Dispute Over Profits

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Manhattan Luxury Condos Sit on Market While Foreign Buyers Wait

    Architect, Engineer, and Design Professional Liens in California: A Different Animal than the Mechanics’ Lien

    House Approves $715B Transportation and Water Infrastructure Bill

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Why A Jury Found That Contractor 'Retaliated' Against Undocumented Craft Worker

    Are Contracting Parties Treated the Same When it Comes to Notice Obligations?

    ADA Compliance Checklist For Your Business

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    Arctic Roads and Runways Face the Prospect of Rapid Decline

    Full Extent of Damage From Turkey Quakes Takes Shape

    U.S. Stocks Fluctuate Near Record After Housing Data

    Colorado’s Three-Bill Approach to Alleged Construction Defect Issues

    Breach of a Construction Contract & An Equitable Remedy?

    Framework, Tallest Mass Timber Project in the U.S., Is On Hold

    New York Court of Appeals Addresses Choice of Law Challenges

    “Time Is Money!” In Construction and This Is Why There Is a Liquidated Damages Provision

    “To Indemnify, or Not to Indemnify, that is the Question: California Court of Appeal Addresses Active Negligence in Indemnity Provisions”

    Renovation Contractors: Be Careful How You Disclose Your Projects

    Low Interest Rates Encourages Homeowners to become Landlords

    Massachusetts Couple Seek to Recuse Judge in Construction Defect Case

    The Four Forces That Will Take on Concrete and Make Construction Smart

    Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Vexed by Low Demand for Mortgages

    Skanska Will Work With Florida on Barge-Caused Damage to Pensacola Bay Bridge

    Plaza Construction Negotiating Pay Settlement for Florida Ritz-Carlton Renovation

    Did the Building Boom Lead to a Boom in Construction Defects?

    The Greenest U.S. Cities & States

    Construction Law Client Alert: Hirer Beware - When Exercising Control Over a Job Site’s Safety Conditions, You May be Held Directly Liable for an Independent Contractor’s Injury

    Contract Should Have Clear and Definite Terms to Avoid a Patent Ambiguity

    Court Orders City to Pay for Sewer Backups

    Hurricane Harvey: Understanding the Insurance Aspects, Immediate Actions for Risk Managers

    Arbitration Clause Found Ambiguous in Construction Defect Case

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (08/17/22) – Glass Ceilings, Floating Homes and the Inflation Reduction Act

    Coronavirus, Force Majeure, and Delay and Time-Impact Claims

    Another Reason to Always Respond (or Hensel Phelps Wins One!)

    Embattled SNC-Lavalin Files Ethics Appeal, Realigns Structure

    BWB&O Senior Associate Kyle Riddles and Associate Alexandria Heins Obtain a Trial Victory in a Multi-Million Dollar Case!

    Issue and Claim Preclusion When Forced to Litigate Similar Issues in Different Forums: White River Village, LLP v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland

    Sometimes, Being too Cute with Pleading Allegations is Unnecessary

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Just Hanging Around”

    Court Rejects Insurer's Argument That Two Triggers Required

    Do Change Orders Need to be in Writing and Other Things That Might Surprise You
    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

    Contractor Entitled to Continued Defense Against Allegations of Faulty Construction

    November 01, 2021 —
    The U.S. District Court found that the contractor was entitled to a defense in the underlying state court action. Pa. Nat'l Mut. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Zonko Builders, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168855 (D. Del. Sept. 7, 2021). Zonko was the general contractor for building the Salt Meadows Townhomes Condominium. This included supervising subcontractors in the installation of siding, house wrap, and flashing in five buildings between 2005 and 2007. In 2016, Salt Meadows and its individual members ("Association") found property damage in the condominiums. The Association sued Zonko in state court, alleged that resulting damages included drywall damage in ceilings or walls, flooring and carpet, water damage around window trim, rot on window frames, incorrect flashing around roofs and windows, possible ridge vent leaks, and possible foundation issues. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Are “Green” Building Designations and Certifications Truly Necessary?

    January 28, 2019 —
    As anyone who reads this construction blog on a regular basis knows, I believe that the move to newer sustainable building practices (while bringing about a new or different set of potential risks) is both necessary and laudable. Because of this fact, you may be asking why the headline for today’s post. After all, I am a LEED AP and assisted in the drafting of the LEED/Green Building addendum to the ConsensusDOCS so I must be pro LEED (or any other) certification of buildings. To the extent that such certification encourages best practices and more sustainable building stock, I am pro certification. However, certification is not a necessary carrot to bring builders around to such practices. As a recent article in EcoHome Magazine (thanks to Todd Hawkins at BuilderFish for alerting me to the article) points out, companies are already moving toward these practices with or without certification and it’s added layer of expense. Economic, air quality, and moral (“its the right thing to do”) factors are pushing executives to such practices. According to EcoHome Magazine, while LEED retains the lions share of green certifications, more and more companies are either using internal standards or trying out other certification programs, including Energy Star. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    Massive Danish Hospital Project Avoids Fire Protection Failures with Imerso Construction AI

    December 23, 2023 —
    Ensuring regulatory compliance of firewall constructions is getting a high-tech boost. Over the past 16 months, the construction team responsible for the iconic new Nyt Hospital Nordsjælland near Copenhagen used Imerso construction AI technology to achieve remarkable results. By using Imerso, the team enhanced work productivity while preventing costs and delays worth €5.2 million during the construction of the superstructure. Inspired by this success, the team led by Project Manager Anders Kaas has since been eager to explore the potential of the technology in other areas. The opportunity arose to address a topic that has traditionally posed significant challenges and expenses in numerous construction projects – ensuring regulatory compliance of fire barriers and firewall constructions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aec-business@aepartners.fi

    Substantial Completion Explained: What Contractors & Owners Should Know

    January 17, 2022 —
    A project’s Substantial Completion date is a critical construction milestone for contractors and owners. Depending on the contract, the date of Substantial Completion has project-specific contractual and statutory consequences. Substantial Completion is an “event” – there is no universal definition of the term. It is generally understood to be (1) a point in time (2) when work performed by the contractor is sufficiently complete (3) where it can be used or occupied for the owner’s intended purpose. The date of Substantial Completion is generally established at the time of contract formation (either as a negotiated or a contract set date), and that date may be adjusted over the course of a project to account for excusable delays. As a construction professional, your attorney should review and tailor any written agreement to your project-specific needs and risk tolerances prior to execution. Savvy construction professionals often start with standard form agreements promulgated by the American Institute of Architects (“AIA”), the Design-Build Institute of America (“DBIA”), or the Engineers Joint Contract Document Committee (“EJCDC”) as the basis for their construction contracts. The AIA, DBIA, and EJCDC standard forms each contains contract provisions relating to when and what happens once Substantial Completion has occurred, subject to any agreed-to, project-specific deviations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Travis Colburn, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Mr. Colburn may be contacted at travis.colburn@acslawyers.com

    Owners and Contractors are Liable for Injuries Caused by their Independent Contractors under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine”

    October 15, 2024 —
    Many contractors and owners believe that if they hire an independent contractor to perform work and that independent contractor causes injury to others during the performance of that work, then it is the independent contractor alone who will be liable for those injuries. In most circumstances, this is correct. The owner or the contractor will not be held liable for injuries caused by his or her independent contractor. However, this is not always the case. Under the “Peculiar Risk Doctrine” and California cases interpreting the doctrine, a contractor or owner who hires an independent contractor to do work which is considered to be “inherently dangerous work” can be still be held directly liable for damages when that independent contractor causes injury to others by negligently performing the work. Such liability can generally be imposed on the one hiring the independent contractor under either of two branches of the peculiar risk doctrine. First, where a person hires an independent contractor to do inherently dangerous work, but fails to provide in the contract or in some other manner that special precautions must be taken to avert the peculiar risk of injury related to that work, then the one hiring the independent contractor can be held liable for injuries to others caused by the independent contractor’s negligence. (Restatement Second of Torts Section 413). For example, in Mackey v. Campbell Construction Co. 101 Cal. App. 3d 774, 162 Cal. Rptr. 64 (1980), Western Electric Company, the owner of the project, was found liable for the personal injuries of a subcontractor’s employee because Western’s representatives were on the job at all times, had doubts about the safety of scaffolding being used on the project, yet failed to require use of precautions that could have been taken to avoid injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Porter, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Porter may be contacted at bporter@porterlaw.com

    Caltrans Hiring of Inexperienced Chinese Builder for Bay Bridge Expansion Questioned

    July 16, 2014 —
    The construction of the new eastern span of San Francisco’s bay bridge has been criticized for the $6.5 billion cost, welding crack violations, and alleged cover ups by Caltrans. The Sacramento Bee reported that the company Shanghai Zhenhua Port Machinery Co. Ltd. (ZPMC) “had never built a bridge.” In fact, ZPMC “was a manufacturer of giant cranes for container ports.” How then did ZPMC manage to obtain the contract? The Sacramento Bee stated that the company “had established a reputation as fast and cost-effective, offering savings of about $250 million compared to the competing bidder.” The project was already “years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget by political squabbles and construction delays” and there were some fears that the “old bridge might not survive a major quake.” Caltrans was told by an outside expert that ZPMC was a “high risk,” however, the company received a “contingent pass.” Sacramento Bee reported that an audit showed “ZPMC didn’t have enough qualified welders or inspectors…and routinely welded in the rain, a basic error that often causes defects.” Regardless, Caltrans signed off on the project. “In August 2007, Caltrans auditors approved ZPMC outright, although the firm still lacked adequate quality control, even for ‘fracture critical’ materials,” the Sacramento Bee reported. During the California Senate committee hearing in January, Doug Coe, a senior Caltrans engineer, said “’The race for time’ created overwhelming pressure to keep moving as planned….But there’s no excuse for building something defective like that because we are in a race for time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    General Contractor’s Excess Insurer Denied Equitable Contribution From Subcontractor’s Excess Insurer

    December 15, 2016 —
    In Advent v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., etc. (No. H041934 filed 12/6/16), a California appeals court refused to order a subcontractor’s excess insurer to contribute to a general contractor’s excess insurer because the general contractor did not qualify as an additional insured of the subcontractor’s insurer, and the policy wording made the subcontractor’s excess insurer second level excess above the general contractor’s own excess insurance. Advent was the general contractor on a housing development and Johnson was a sub-subcontractor providing concrete on perimeter walls. A Johnson employee dispatched to retrieve plywood dumped between some of the buildings somehow fell down an open stairwell inside one of the unfinished buildings and suffered serious injury. He sued Advent and others for negligence, but could not remember how he fell. Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    "Your Work" Exclusion Bars Coverage for Contractor's Faulty Workmanship

    December 02, 2015 —
    The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals found there was no coverage for the contractor's faulty workmanship in constructing a home. State of W. Virginia ex rel. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. The Honorable Ronald E. Wilson, 2015 W. Va. LEXIS 963 (W. Va. Oct. 7, 2015). In July 2009, Fred Hlad contracted to build a home for the Nelsons and complete construction by November 2009. The Nelsons sued when the house was not timely completed. Nationwide defended under a reservation of rights, but then filed a declaratory judgment action.The circuit court denied Nationwide's request for declaratory relief, determining that the defective workmanship was an "occurrence." Nationwide petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of prohibition. On appeal, Nationwide argued that eight of the nine counts in the Nelsons' complaint were not caused by his defective workmanship. These allegations included breach of contract claims and intentional torts. Nationwide submitted it was not obligated to indemnify Hlad for damages that may be recovered on those counts. The court agreed that Nationwide's duty to indemnify was limited only to those claims that triggered coverage. Accordingly, Nationwide had no duty to indemnify for the eight counts alleging breach of contract and intentional torts. 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