BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington forensic architectSeattle Washington structural concrete expertSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington civil engineer expert witnessSeattle Washington architect 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


    Monitoring Building Moisture with RFID – Interview with Jarmo Tuppurainen

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California Appeals Court Refuses to Apply Professional Services Exclusion to Products-Completed Operations Loss

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    ASCE Statement On White House "Accelerating Infrastructure Summit"

    Newark Trial Team Obtains Affirmance of Summary Judgment for General Contractor Client

    Quick Note: Aim to Avoid a Stay to your Miller Act Payment Bond Claim

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Three Reasons Late Payments Persist in the Construction Industry

    Port Authority Revises Plans for $10B Midtown NYC Bus Terminal Replacement

    Index Demonstrates Increase in Builders’ Sentiment

    Montana Court Finds Duty to Defend over Construction Defect Allegation

    Where Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Collide

    Treble Damages Awarded After Insurer Denies Coverage for Collapse

    Construction Companies Must Prepare for a Surge of Third-Party Contractors

    Colorado Finally Corrects Thirty-Year Old Flaw in Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Autovol’s Affordable Housing Project with Robotic Automation

    Who is Responsible for Construction Defect Repairs?

    Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

    Construction Contractor “Mean Tweets” Edition

    I’m Sorry, So Sorry: Legal Implications of Apologies and Admissions of Fault for Delaware Healthcare Professionals

    Caterpillar Forecast Tops Estimates as Construction Recovers

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    What Happens When Dave Chappelle Buys Up Your Town

    2018 Construction Outlook: Mature Expansion, Deceleration in Some Sectors, Continued Growth in Others

    When Are General Conditions and General Requirements Covered by Builder's Risk

    WA Supreme Court Allows Property Owner to Sue Engineering Firm for Lost Profits

    Mediating is Eye Opening

    Recent Opinions Clarify Enforceability of Pay-if-Paid Provisions in Construction Contracts

    Massachusetts Clarifies When the Statute of Repose is Triggered For a Multi-Phase or Multi-Building Project

    Indirect Benefit Does Not Support Unjust Enrichment Claim Against Prime Contractor

    Sustainable, Versatile and Resilient: How Mass Timber Construction Can Shake Up the Building Industry

    Consider the Risks Associated with an Exculpatory Clause

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    Testing Your Nail Knowledge

    Insurance and Your Roof

    The Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC) and the Construction Defect Claims Managers Association (CDMA) Annual Construction Defect Seminar

    Are Proprietary Specifications Illegal?

    CDJ’s Year-End Review: The Top 12 CD Topics of 2015

    Utah’s Highest Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Properly Commence an Action to Rely on the Relation-Back Doctrine to Overcome the Statute of Repose

    Developer Transition – Washington DC Condominiums

    Contractor Haunted by “Demonized” Flooring

    Largest Dam Removal Program in US History Reaches Milestone

    New Report: Civil Engineering Salaries and Job Satisfaction Are Strong and Climbing at a Faster Rate Than Past Reports

    Client Alert: California’s Unfair Competition Law (B&P §17200) Preempted by Federal Workplace Safety Law

    Finding Plaintiff Intentionally Spoliated Evidence, the Northern District of Indiana Imposes Sanction

    Kaylin Jolivette Named LADC's Construction and Commercial Practice Chair

    Rise in Single-Family Construction Anticipated in Michigan

    Colorado “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” and exclusions j(5) and j(6) “that particular part”

    Lost Rental Income not a Construction Defect

    New Jersey Judge Declared Arbitrator had no Duty to Disclose Past Contact with Lawyer
    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

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    March 28, 2012 —

    Year-end economic indicators demonstrate that private commercial construction may be increasing in 2012, primarily as demand grows for new projects built in the United States.

    According to an article in Businessweek, the Architecture Billings Index held at 52 in December, indicating a modest expansion in the market. The American Institute of Architects said that the commercial and industrial component of the number climbed to 54.1 in December, the highest in 10 months.

    The monthly survey of U.S.-based architecture firms is one of the main indicators of nonresidential construction, and these numbers suggest that modest improvement may be on the horizon.

    The information is confirmed by data from the Census Bureau that shows that spending on lodging, office, commercial and manufacturing buildings grew 8.2 percent in November to $9.2 billion from a year ago. These types of commercial and industrial projects are historically canaries in the mine and are usually the first part of the industry to improve as the economy expands.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback of Ragsdale Liggett PLLC. Ms. Brumback can be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com.

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

    Breaking News: Connecticut Supreme Court Decides Significant Coverage Issues in R.T. Vanderbilt

    December 16, 2019 —
    On October 4, 2019 (almost two years after granting certification), the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Court’s rulings on four key coverage issues in R.T. Vanderbilt Company v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, et al. The coverage dispute in Vanderbilt concerns underlying actions alleging that talc and silica mined and sold by the insured contained asbestos and/or caused asbestos-related disease. The case has been proceeding in phases, two of which have been tried to date, resulting in the matter on appeal. (1) “Continuous Trigger” Theory of Coverage Applies: The Court affirmed and adopted the Appellate Court’s opinion applying a “continuous trigger” for the underlying claims at issue, and agreed that the trial court properly excluded testimony from medical experts the insurers had proffered to prove that the asbestos disease process did not support a continuous trigger. (2) The “Unavailability of Insurance” Exception to Time-on-Risk Pro Rata Allocation Applies: The Court affirmed and adopted the Appellate Court’s ruling that (a) damages and defense costs should not be allocated to any period in which insurance was “unavailable” in the market, (b) the insurers bear the burden of proving that coverage for asbestos liabilities was available to the policyholder after the date asbestos exclusions were added to the policies and (c) the insured bears the burden of proving that it was unable to obtain asbestos coverage prior to 1986 (when such insurance was generally available). The Appellate Court recognized that, in certain circumstances, there could be an “equitable exception” to the unavailability rule if the insured continued to manufacture products containing asbestos after 1986 with the knowledge that such products were hazardous and uninsurable (circumstances which the court found were not present in this case). Reprinted courtesy of Patricia B. Santelle, White and Williams LLP and Ciaran B. Way, White and Williams LLP Ms. Santelle may be contacted at santellep@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Way may be contacted at wayc@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards

    October 10, 2013 —
    Home sales and prices are up in Nashville, Tennessee, but it isn’t the locals who are responsible. “People are moving from Florida, California, Texas, Arizona. People come from New York and New Jersey and can’t believe the home values and low taxes,” said Margaret Dixon, a Tennessee realtor. And they’re moving to areas that the locals haven’t embraced. They “don’t have imaginary boundaries in their heads.” As a result, home sales are up 22% in the third quarter with a 9% rise in prices, as compared to the same quarter last year in Davidson County, where Nashville is located. In adjacent Williamson County, sales were up even more, with a 31% increase in volume and a 12% increase in price. Smyrna, home of Nissan’s LEAF electric car, saw a 25.5% increase in sales volume. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bad Faith Claim for Inadequate Investigation Does Not Survive Summary Judgment

    May 20, 2015 —
    The insured's claim for bad faith investigation regarding their hail damage claim did not survive the insurer's motion for summary judgment. Amarillo Hospitality Tenant, LLC v. Mass. Bay Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56228 (N. D. Tex. April 29, 2015). A hailstorm caused damage to the Courtyard Marriot. The day after the storm, the insured inspected the roof of the hotel and observed damage to a sign and some aluminum vent tubes. No damage to the roof itself was observed. Subsequently, leaks were found on the tenth floor of the hotel. A public adjuster concluded that the roof had sustained damage during the hailstorm. The insured filed a claim with Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company. The insurer paid for the cost of repairing the damaged sign. To determine whether the damage to the roof was caused by the hailstorm, the insurer hired Donna Engineering, who conducted two inspections of the roof. Both inspections concluded that the hailstorm did not cause damage to the roof. Consequently, the claim was denied. 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

    It’s a Bird, It’s a Plane . . . No, It’s a Drone. Long Awaited FAA Drone Regulations Finally Take Flight

    September 22, 2016 —
    It’s a bird. It’s a plane. No, it’s a drone. Also known as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) or unmanned aircraft (UA). And, technically, they’ve been around a long time, since at least 1849 when the Australians attacked Italy with unmanned balloons loaded with explosives. Even a young Marilyn Monroe, when she was known simply as “Norma Jean,” worked at a company called Radioplane making unmanned aircrafts during World War II. Since then, as technology has advanced, which, in turn, has made the cost of older technology go down, what was once old, is now new again. Drones are making regular appearances in the movies (think the Divergent Series: Allegiant). The paparazzi (who are apparently tired of getting punched in the face) are using them. And some day, perhaps very soon, they may just be delivering your packages (think Amazon Prime Air). One of the earliest adopters of drones outside the military, however, has been the construction industry which has used drones to track the progress of construction projects and conduct site surveys such as this one showing the progress of Apple’s new campus in Cupertino[.] 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

    Lawsuit Gives Teeth to Massachusetts Pay Law

    September 16, 2024 —
    “The Massachusetts Legislature passed the state’s Prompt Pay Act 14 years ago to improve the downstream flow of money on most large-scale private construction projects. While the act established detailed protocols for administering applications for payment and other important construction phase processes, several questions about its interpretation and impact remained unanswered. Over the years, I watched as a significant portion of the Massachusetts design and construction community either ignored the law’s exacting requirements or were unaware of their applicability. The first indication of how the act would be interpreted came in 2022, when the state appeals court decided Tocci Building Corp. v. IRIV Partners LLC. In that case, the court strictly construed the act. It held that an owner (and its agent) who failed to promptly advise the project’s general contractor of specific factual and legal reasons why it was withholding payment, coupled with a failure to certify that funds were being withheld in good faith, violated the law—making the contractor liable for the unpaid funds. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph Barra, Robinson+Cole
    Mr. Barra may be contacted at jbarra@rc.com

    How You Plead Allegations to Trigger Liability Insurer’s Duties Is Critical

    November 01, 2021 —
    How you plead allegations in your lawsuit to trigger duties of a liability insurance carrier is a critical consideration. If the complaint is not pled appropriately, it can result in the carrier NOT owing a duty to defend its insured, which is the party(ies) you are suing. If there is no duty to defend, there will be no duty to indemnify the insured to cover your damages. For this reason, in a number of circumstances, this is NOT what you want because you want to trigger insurance coverage and potential proceeds to be paid by a carrier to cover your damages. There are times when you are confronted with a case that just is not a good insurance coverage case. This may result in you coming up with creative arguments to maximize insurance coverage. Even in these times, you want to plead the complaint to best maximize coverage under the creative arguments you have developed. An example of not pleading allegations in a complaint to trigger an insurer’s duties can be found in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in Tricon Development of Brevard, Inc. v. Nautilus Insurance Co., 2021 WL 4129373 (11th Cir. 2021). This case involved a general contractor constructing condominiums. The general contractor hired a subcontractor to fabricate and install metal railings. The subcontractor had a commercial general liability (CGL) policy that named the general contractor as an additional insured with respect to liability for property damage “caused in whole or in part” by the subcontractor’s direct or vicarious acts or omissions. (This is a good additional insured endorsement.) 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 Federal District Court Dismisses COVID-19 Claim

    October 25, 2020 —
    Judge Ezra, formerly on the bench in Hawaii, dismissed a COVID-19 claim pursued by a Texas policy holder. Diesel Barbershop, LLC v. State Farm Lloyds, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147276 (W.D. Texas Aug. 13, 2020). Local and state officials in Texas issued shutdown orders in March 2020 due to the spread of the cornavirus. All non-essential businesses, including the insureds' barbershop businesses, were ordered closed from April 2, 2020 until April 30, 2020. The insureds submitted a claim for business interruption and civil authority coverage to their carrier, State Farm. The claim was denied based on the policy's exclusion for loss caused by enforcement of ordinance or law, virus, and consequential losses. For Civil Authority coverage, State Farm contended the policy required that there by physical damage within one mile of the described property and that the damage be the result of a Covered Cause of Loss, which, State Farm asserted, a virus was not. The insureds sued and State Farm moved to dismiss. The court noted cases in which courts had found physical loss even without tangible destruction to the covered property. Yet, the court found that the line of cases requiring tangible injury to property were more persuasive. Therefore, the court found that the insureds failed to plead a direct physical loss. 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