BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington eifs expert witnessSeattle Washington architecture expert witnessSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington consulting engineersSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failure
    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


    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    Freight Train Carrying Hot Asphalt, Molten Sulfur Plunges Into Yellowstone River as Bridge Fails

    Mass Timber Reduces Construction’s Carbon Footprint, But Introduces New Risk Scenarios

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Explore Legal Immigration Options for Construction Companies

    French Government Fines National Architects' Group $1.6M Over Fee-Fixing

    Beginning of the 2020 Colorado Legislative Session: Here We Go Again

    What is a Personal Injury?

    Can a Non-Union Company Be Compelled to Arbitrate?

    2024 Construction Law Update

    Evergrande’s Condemned Towers on China’s Hawaii Show Threat

    Interior Designer Licensure

    Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship Is Not an "Occurrence"

    Court Strikes Down Reasonable Construction Defect Settlement

    Do You Have an Innovation Strategy?

    Florida Adopts Less Stringent Summary Judgment Standard

    National Lobbying Firm Opens Colorado Office, Strengthening Construction Defect Efforts

    Harmon Tower Opponents to Try Mediation

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

    Traub Lieberman Partners Lisa Rolle, Erin O’Dea, and Nicole Verzillo Win Motion for Summary Judgment in Favor of Property Owner

    Eleventh Circuit Rules That Insurer Must Defend Contractor Despite “Your Work” Exclusion, Where Damage Timing Unclear

    Three Recent Cases Strike Down Liquidated Damages Clauses In Settlement Agreements…A Trend Or An Aberration?

    Michigan Court Waives Goodbye to Subrogation Claims, Except as to Gross Negligence

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Potential Coverage Issues Implicated by the Champlain Towers Collapse

    Supreme Court Set to Alter Law on Key Project, Workforce Issues

    New York’s Second Department Holds That Carrier Must Pay Judgment Obtained by Plaintiff as Carrier Did Not Meet Burden to Prove Willful Non-Cooperation

    VOSH Jumps Into the Employee Misclassification Pool

    North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury Claims Arising Out of Direct Exposure to PFAs

    City of Pawtucket Considering Forensic Investigation of Tower

    Congratulations to Las Vegas Team on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    Lennar Profit Tops Estimates as Home Prices Increase

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    AECOM Out as General Contractor on $1.6B MSG Sphere in Las Vegas

    Manhattan’s Property Boom Pushes Landlords to Sell Early

    Stop Losing Proposal Competitions

    Virtual Reality for Construction

    Garlock Five Years Later: Recent Decisions Illustrate Ongoing Obstacles to Asbestos Trust Transparency

    Heat Stress Deaths Show Europe Isn’t Ready for Climate Change

    Traub Lieberman Partner Bradley T. Guldalian Wins Summary Judgment in Pinellas County Circuit Court

    Forecast Sunny for Solar Contractors in California

    Court Rules Planned Development of Banning Ranch May Proceed

    Alaska Supreme Court Dismisses Claims of Uncooperative Pro Se Litigant in Defect Case

    Reminder: The Devil is in the Mechanic’s Lien Details

    When Cyber Crooks Steal Payments, Think Insurance Makes Up The Loss? Think Again.

    Settlement Conference May Not Be the End in Construction Defect Case

    ICYMI: Highlights From ABC Convention 2024

    Massive Fire Destroys Building, Firefighters Rescue Construction Worker

    Big Changes and Trends in the Real Estate Industry
    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

    Navigate the New Health and Safety Norm With Construction Technology

    August 03, 2020 —
    Safety has always been a pressing issue in construction, and as states reopen and construction projects pick up steam once again, the industry will become even more closely scrutinized than before. Construction safety looks a lot different than it did six months ago. In addition to the concerns around keeping workers safe on construction sites, today’s contractors are faced with a whole new category of risk, and with new health and safety measures that may vary by county, state or region. New requirements range from social distancing and limits on the size of crews, to requiring masks and temperature checks for all workers. OPERATING IN THE NEW NORM This sudden onset of COVID-19 put otherwise healthy businesses into a state of chaos that, months later, is still hard to navigate. By March of 2020, reports indicated that nearly one-third of construction projects had come to a halt. Now, as the industry emerges, balancing business continuity efforts with trying to get crews back to work and jobsites moving again will no doubt present challenges. New health and safety measures, plus the fact that no one wants to touch paper in the field, will add another layer of administrative and procedural oversight to the construction process. Of course, these measures are absolutely needed, but construction businesses can’t ignore the fact that it changes the very way projects and jobsites are managed. And, without the right tools in place, it may be a bumpy ride. Reprinted courtesy of Jeremy Larsen, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of
    Mr. Larsen may be contacted at jeremy.larsen@viewpoint.com

    CGL, Builders Risk Coverage and Exclusions When Construction Defects Cause Property Damage

    May 17, 2021 —
    Direct damage to property under construction caused by faulty or defective work or defective materials has been a coverage issue for decades. Two specific policies, the Commercial General Liability for the contractors building the structure and the Builders Risk Policy on the project both are sources of potential coverage. A CGL policy protects the named insured (the contractor in this case) from third party liability arising out of the insured’s operations that results in either bodily injury or property damage. Damage to property caused by poor workmanship or defective materials would qualify as property damage. To understand how the CGL policy might respond to claims such as these, it is necessary to evaluate several exclusions in the CGL policy. CGL policies cover “property damage,” defined as physical injury to tangible property, including loss of use of such property, and loss of use of tangible property that has not been physically injured. Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey Cavignac, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Excess Carrier's Declaratory Judgment Action Stayed While Underlying Case Still Pending

    June 11, 2014 —
    The federal district court determined the excess carrier's declaratory judgment action to establish it had no coverage obligations should be stayed while the underlying case was still pending. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Ortiz & Assocs., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64286 (D. Ore. May 9, 2014). The subcontractor's employee was killed on the job site when struck by a dump truck owned by the general contractor, Inland Asphalt Co. Island was sued for wrongful death. Island was an additional insured under the subcontractor's primary policy and excess policy with Scottsdale. Inland put Scottsdale on notice of the underlying wrongful death lawsuit, but did not tender its defense to Scottsdale. 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

    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

    GRSM Attorneys Selected to 2024 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Lists

    January 14, 2025 —
    Super Lawyers® has released its 2024 attorney lists across various regions of the United States. This year, 169 Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani attorneys have been selected, with 51 named to Super Lawyers and 118 named to Rising Stars. *For attorneys licensed to practice in New Jersey: No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Please visit the Super Lawyers Selection Process for a detailed description of the Super Lawyers and Rising Stars selection methodology. The selections are a result of independent research by the team at Super Lawyers® to determine no more than the top five percent of legal professionals in each geographic region. The research team selects no more than two and a half percent of the lawyers in each geographic region to the Rising Stars list. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

    Arbitration Provisions Are Challenging To Circumvent

    May 13, 2019 —
    Arbitration provisions are enforceable and they are becoming more challenging to circumvent, especially if one of the parties to the arbitration agreement wants to arbitrate a dispute versus litigate a dispute. Remember this when agreeing to an arbitration provision as the forum for dispute resolution in your contract. There is not a one-size-fits-all model when it comes to arbitration provisions and how they are drafted. But, there is a very strong public policy in favor of honoring a contractual arbitration provision because this is what the parties agreed to as the forum to resolve their disputes. By way of example, in Austin Commercial, L.P. v. L.M.C.C. Specialty Contractors, Inc., 44 Fla.L.Weekly D925a (Fla. 2d DCA 2019), a subcontractor and prime contactor entered into a consultant agreement that contained the following arbitration provision:
    Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures, if any, set out in the Prime Contract between [Prime Contractor] and the [Owner]. Should the Prime Contract contain no specific requirement for the resolution of disputes or should the [Owner] not be involved in the dispute, any such controversy or claim shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to the Construction Industry Rules of the American Arbitration Association then prevailing, and judgment upon the award by the Arbitrator(s) shall be entered in any Court having jurisdiction thereof.
    The prime contract between the owner and prime contractor did not require arbitration. 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

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    October 17, 2022 —
    Summary judgment awarded to the insurer was reversed because the insurer presented no evidence of prejudice caused by untimely notice. Perez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 5435 (Fla. Ct. App. Aug. 10, 2022). The insureds' home suffered water damage due to Hurricane Irma around September 10, 2017. A claim was submitted to Citizens on November 27, 2018. Citizens had an independent adjuster inspect, but then denied the claim due to untimely notice. The insureds sued and Citizens moved for summary judgment. Citizens argued it was prejudiced because it could not confirm the cause of the loss or the property damage attributed to it. The court agreed that the insureds' notice was untimely. The insureds were notified by tenants renting the property that leaks appeared around the time of Hurriane Irma. The policy language, however, placed the burden to rebut the presumption of prejudice caused by late notice on Citizens. Whether the insurer was prejudiced was a question of fact. Citizens failed to demonstrate any prejudice due to the untimely notice. 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

    New York State Trial Court: Non-Cumulation Provision in Excess Policies Mandates “All Sums” Allocation

    October 02, 2018 —
    On August 18, 2018, the New York Supreme Court, New York County, confirmed a referee’s finding that “all sums” allocation was required under excess policies issued by Midland Insurance Company because they included a non-cumulation provision. See Matter of Liquidation of Midland Ins. Co., Index No. 041294/1986 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2018). Midland was a multi-line carrier that wrote a substantial amount of excess coverage for Fortune 500 companies. In the 1980s, Midland faced significant exposure for environmental, asbestos and product liability claims. In 1986, it was placed in liquidation and the New York State Superintendent of Insurance (the Liquidator) was appointed as its receiver. Since then, the New York Supreme Court has presided over the liquidation proceedings. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Paul Briganti, White & Williams LLP
    Mr. Briganti may be contacted at brigantip@whiteandwilliams.com