BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert testimonySeattle Washington civil engineer expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington structural concrete expertSeattle Washington expert witness windowsSeattle Washington construction experts
    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


    Do Not Pass Go! Duty to Defend in a Professional Services Agreement (law note)

    Get Smarter About Electric Construction Equipment

    L.A. Mixes Grit With Glitz in Downtown Revamp: Cities

    'There Was No Fighting This Fire,' California Survivor Says

    Just When You Thought the Green Building Risk Discussion Was Over. . .

    School Board Settles Construction Defect Suit

    Don’t Put All Your Eggs in the Silent-Cyber Basket

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

    Be a Good Neighbor: Techniques to Mitigate the Risk of Claims from Adjacent Landowners

    As Evidence Grows, Regions Prepare for Sea Level Rise

    Curtain Wall Suppliers Claim Rival Duplicated Unique System

    Construction Is Holding Back the Economy

    Subcontractors on Washington Public Projects can now get their Retainage Money Sooner

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

    Digital Twins – Interview with Cristina Savian

    Does a Broker Forfeit His or Her Commission for Technical Non-Compliance with Department of Real Estate Statutory Requirements?

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

    Construction Industry Groups Challenge DOL’s New DBRA Regulations

    Court Calls Lease-Leaseback Project What it is: A Design-Bid-Build Project

    Several Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured in Sacramento Magazine’s 2023 Top Lawyers!

    Congratulations to Nicole Whyte, Keith Bremer, John Toohey, and Tyler Offenhauser for Being Recognized as 2022 Super Lawyers!

    Review the Terms and Conditions of Purchase Orders- They Could be Important!

    Construction Laborers Sue Contractors Over Wage Theft

    Court Finds That $400 Million Paid Into Abatement Fund Qualifies as “Damages” Under the Insured’s Policies

    Partner John Toohey and Senior Associate Sammy Daboussi Obtain a Complete Defense Verdict for Their Contractor Client!

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “A Close Call?”

    Green Home Predictions That Are Best Poised to Come True in 2014 and Beyond (guest post)

    Miller Act and “Public Work of the Federal Government”

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

    Insurance Law Client Alert: California FAIR Plan Limited to Coverage Provided by Statutory Fire Insurance Policy

    Hovnanian Reports “A Year of Solid Profitability”

    A Place to Study Eternity: Building the Giant Magellan Telescope

    Claims against Broker for Insufficient Coverage Fail

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    Insurers' Motion to Void Coverage for Failure to Attend EUO Denied

    Coverage Found for Faulty Workmanship Damaging Other Property

    Suit Against Broker for Securing Inadequate Coverage Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

    Claimants’ Demand for Superfluous Wording In Release Does Not Excuse Insurer’s Failure to Accept Policy Limit Offer Within Time Specified

    Updated: Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Cause Still Unclear in March Retaining Wall Collapse on $900M NJ Interchange

    No One to Go After for Construction Defects at Animal Shelter

    Account for the Imposition of Material Tariffs in your Construction Contract

    Affirmed: Nationwide Acted in Bad Faith by Failing to Settle Within Limits

    One Shot to Get It Right: Navigating the COVID-19 Vaccine in the Workplace

    The Regulations on the Trump Administration's Chopping Block

    Florida “Property Damage” caused by an “Occurrence” and “Your Work” Exclusion

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” in four practice areas and Tier 2 in one practice area by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2021

    Washington Supreme Court Finds Agent’s Representations in Certificate of Insurance Bind Insurance Company to Additional Insured Coverage

    Insurer's Bad Faith is Actionable Tort for Purposes of Choice of Law Analysis

    The Quiet War Between California’s Charter Cities and the State’s Prevailing Wage Law
    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

    California Builders’ Right To Repair Is Alive

    March 19, 2014 —
    The California Supreme Court surprised everyone on December 11, 2013 when it denied Brookfield Homes’ request for review of the ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC (2014) 219 Cal.App.4th 98, which was decided by the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District Division Three (Orange County). In that case the Court of Appeal held that the Right to Repair Act aka SB800 is not the exclusive remedy for a homeowner seeking damages for construction defects that have resulted in property damage. Under the ruling, homeowners may choose to sue builders under common law theories of liability such as strict liability and negligence, in addition to liability under the Act. This ruling made homeowners' compliance with the prelitigation requirements of the Act optional and thereby put builders' “right to repair” in jeopardy. The ruling undermined the expectations of California's homebuilders who, for the past decade, understood that their liability is limited by the Act and that they have a right to repair. Since the Liberty Mutual case was handed down, the topic has become a hotbed item with several divisions of the Court of Appeal. On February 19, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Three (Los Angeles County) issued a ruling against Premier Homes in the case of Burch v. Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 159 that, without independent analysis, simply adopted the holding in the Liberty Mutual case. But on February 21, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District Division Four (Los Angeles County) ruled in the case of KB Home Greater Los Angeles, Inc. v.Superior Court 2014 Cal.App.LEXIS 167 that a homeowner's failure to give the builder an opportunity to inspect and repair a construction defect excused the builder's liability under the Act. Additionally, the Court of Appeal went out of its way to state it had ruled earlier in that case that the Act is the exclusive remedy. The various rulings lay a foundation for ultimate intervention by the California Supreme Court. In the meantime, these opposing cases will be cited by counsel for homeowners and builders alike for opposing positions as they continue to navigate construction defect disputes. Mr. Byassee is a strategic litigator specializing in representation of builders and developers. For more information regarding dispute resolution procedures under SB800, Mr. Byassee may be contacted at (949) 250-9797 or by email at dbyassee@ut-law.com. Published courtesy of David J. Byassee, Ulich & Terry LLP Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Liquidating Agreements—Bridging the Privity Gap for Subcontractors

    September 03, 2015 —
    What is a subcontractor to do when the owner has demanded additional work, but has refused to pay for it? Typically, a subcontractor cannot sue the owner because the subcontractor doesn’t have a contract with the owner. Perhaps the subcontractor and general contractor should enter into a liquidating agreement through which the general contractor can pursue the claim on behalf of the subcontractor. Liquidating agreements bridge the privity gap between owners and subcontractors who sustain damages because of the others actions. Liquidating agreements or pass-through agreements grant the general contractor a release of its liability to the subcontractor after the general contractor prosecutes the subcontractor’s pass-through claim against the owner and gives the subcontractor any recovery. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig Martin, Lamson, Dugan and Murray, LLP
    Mr. Martin may be contacted at cmartin@ldmlaw.com

    No Coverage Under Installation Policy When Read Together with Insurance Application

    January 16, 2024 —
    A recent case out of the Eleventh Circuit denied an underground contractor’s claim under what appears to be a commercial property installation floater policy (inland marine coverage) that covers the contractor’s materials. Whereas a builder’s risk policy is more expansive, an installation floater is narrower and can provide protection to a contractor for materials and equipment in transit, stored, or being installed subject to the terms of the installation floater policy. It can provide coverage to a trade subcontractor for materials that aren’t covered by builder’s risk. In Travelers Property Casualty Company of America v. Talcon Group, LLC, 2023 WL 8798053 (11th Cir. 2023), an underground utility contractor that had a general contractor’s license had an installation policy that provided coverage “only for underground utility operations and the site development work tied to those operations.” Talcon Group, supra, at *1. The utility contractor was constructing two residential homes that was on land owned by an affiliated family entity. During construction of the residential homes, a wildfire destroyed the homes prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy. The utility contractor submitted a notice of loss to its insurance carrier that provided the installation policy. The carrier denied the claim because the construction of the homes was NOT the same type of work as the installation of underground utilities which was covered. An insurance coverage lawsuit ensued. 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

    The Contingency Fee Multiplier (For Insurance Coverage Disputes)

    September 10, 2018 —
    The contingency fee multiplier: a potential incentive for taking a case on contingency, such as an insurance coverage dispute, where the insured sues his/her/its insurer on a contingency fee basis. In a recent property insurance coverage dispute, Citizens Property Ins. Corp. v. Agosta, 43 Fla.L.Weekly, D1934b (Fla. 3d DCA 2018), the trial court awarded the insured’s counsel a contingency fee multiplier of two times the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees. The insurer appealed. The Third District affirmed the contingency fee multiplier. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    U.K. to Set Out Plan for Fire-Risk Apartment Cladding Crisis

    March 01, 2021 —
    The U.K. government will set out its plans for stripping cladding from potentially unsafe apartment blocks, more than three years after a fire at London’s Grenfell Tower killed 72 people. Reports suggest Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick will set out a package of measures amounting to billions of pounds when he makes a statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday. Ministers announced a 1.6 billion pound ($2.2 billion) “safety fund” to remove dangerous cladding last year but Jenrick is expected to announce additional support on top of this. The price for the repairs could be as high as 15 billion pounds, according to a parliamentary committee last June. Reprinted courtesy of Emily Ashton, Bloomberg and Olivia Konotey-Ahulu, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Safety Officials Investigating Death From Fall

    September 09, 2011 —

    California safety officials are looking into the circumstances surrounding the death of a construction worker who fell from a roof in Tiburon, California. Another worker found Gabriel Vasquez unconscious at the site. Vasquez was later pronounced dead. The State Division of Occupational Safety and Health are trying to determine how Vasquez fell.

    Read the full story…

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

    In One of the First Civil Jury Trials to Proceed Live in Los Angeles Superior Court During Covid, Aneta Freeman Successfully Prevailed on Behalf of our Client and Obtained a Directed Verdict and Non-Suit

    July 05, 2021 —
    In one of the first civil jury trials to proceed live in Los Angeles Superior Court during Covid, Aneta Freeman obtained a rare directed verdict and nonsuit in a complex, high exposure action, after seven days of trial. The dismissal was obtained after the parties rested after the liability phase of the bifurcated trial. Ms. Freeman represented a general contractor in an action in which Plaintiff alleged that the general contractor and the County of Los Angeles (which was dismissed earlier on statutory immunity grounds) created a dangerous condition when they allegedly allowed mosquitos to breed in 2015 during construction at a flood retention basin in Marina Del Rey. Plaintiff contracted West Nile Virus, and subsequently developed myasthenia gravis and a myriad of other conditions and ailments. Plaintiff relied heavily on a 2015 report from the Los Angeles West Vector Control District which suggested that the construction was the source of mosquitos which resulted in a “cluster” of West Nile Virus cases in the Marina Del Rey and surrounding areas. In pretrial motions, Ms. Freeman successfully excluded that report, opinion testimony from the vector control former executive director, narrowed the scope of plaintiff’s entomologist testimony, and excluded Brad Avrit from testifying for the Plaintiff on construction standard of care. The matter proceeded with a stipulated a 10 person jury, and all participants socially distanced and masked throughout the trial. Witnesses appeared live, with the exception of Plaintiff’s entomologist, portions of whose video deposition were played. Following seven days of trial after both parties rested, Judge Mark Young granted the general contractor’s nonsuit and also, in the alternative, a directed a verdict for our client. Plaintiff had demanded $10,000,000 of the County and the general contractor globally prior to trial, and $5,000,000 from the general contractor. The general contractor issued two CCP 998s, which were ignored by Plaintiff. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aneta B. Freeman, Chapman Glucksman Dean & Roeb
    Ms. Freeman may be contacted at afreeman@cgdrlaw.com

    California Supreme Court Finds that When it Comes to Intentional Interference Claims, Public Works Projects are Just Different, Special Even

    November 21, 2017 —
    Originally published by CDJ on April 20, 2017 Earlier, we reported on a California Court of Appeals decision – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. – which held for the first time that a second-place bidder on a public works contract could sue a winning bidder who failed to pay its workers prevailing wages, under the business tort of intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. Fast forward nearly two years, several amicus briefs, and “one doghouse”* later and the California Supreme Court has . . . reversed. The Roy Allan Slurry Seal Case To catch you up, or rather, refresh your recollection . . . Between 2009 and 2012, American Asphalt South, Inc. was awarded 23 public works contracts totaling more than $14.6 million throughout Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Two of the losing bidders on those projects – Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. and Doug Martin Contracting, Inc. – sued American in each of these counties for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage as well as under the Unfair Practices Act (“UPA”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17000 et seq.) and the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) (Bus. & Prof. Code §17200). 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