BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    Medical building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witness consultantSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington multi family design 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


    Construction Law Alert: Appellate Court Rules General Contractors Can Contractually Subordinate Mechanics Lien Rights

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Just Because You Allege There Was an Oral Contract Doesn’t Mean You’re Off the Hook for Attorneys’ Fees if you Lose

    Delaware Supreme Court Won’t Halt Building

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    Wall Street’s Favorite Suburban Housing Bet Is Getting Crowded

    Bridges Crumble as Muni Rates at Least Since ’60s Ignored

    Trends in Project Delivery Methods in Construction

    BHA’s Next MCLE Seminar in San Diego on July 25th

    NTSB Pittsburgh Bridge Probe Update Sheds Light on Collapse Sequence

    Insurance Measures Passed by 2015 Hawaii Legislature

    Partner Denis Moriarty and Of Counsel William Baumgaertner Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017

    Legislative Update on Bills of Note (Updated Post-Adjournment)

    Construction Defect Journal Seeks Article Submissions Regarding SB800 and Other Builders Right to Repair Laws

    Bremer Whyte’s Newport Beach Team Prevails on a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Wrongful Death Case!

    Florida Supreme Court Adopts Federal Summary Judgment Standard, Substantially Conforming Florida’s Rule 1.510 to Federal Rule 56

    Prospective Additional Insureds May Be Obligated to Arbitrate Coverage Disputes

    Montana Trial Court Holds That Youths Have Standing to Bring Constitutional Claims Against State Government For Alleged Climate Change-Related Harms

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    It Pays to Review the ‘Review the Contract Documents’ Clause Before You Sign the Contract

    Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences as Affirmative Defense

    What are Section 8(f) Agreements?

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

    Concerns About On-the-job Safety Persist

    Pennsylvania Modular Home Builder Buys Maine Firm

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized as 2021 Top Lawyers by Hudson Valley Magazine

    New Pedestrian, Utility Bridge Takes Shape on Everett Waterfront

    Mediation in the Zero Sum World of Construction

    Connecticut Appellate Court Breaks New Ground on Policy Exhaustion

    Washington State Safety Officials Cite Contractor After Worker's Fatal Fall

    Settlement between IOSHA and Mid-America Reached after Stage Collapse Fatalities

    Unesco Denies Claim It Cleared Construction of Zambezi Dam

    Short on Labor, Israeli Builders Seek to Vaccinate Palestinians

    Alabama Supreme Court States Faulty Workmanship can be an Occurrence

    Business Risk Exclusions (j) 5 and (j) 6 Found Ambiguous

    Homebuilder Predictions for Tallahassee

    Massachusetts Affordable Homes Act Provides New Opportunities for Owners, Developers, and Contractors

    Sometimes You Get Away with Unwritten Contracts. . .

    Colorado homebuilders target low-income buyers with bogus "affordable housing" bill

    Alabama Supreme Court Finds No Coverage for Construction Defect to Contractor's own Product

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    House Passes $25B Water Resources Development Bill

    Wildfire Insurance Coverage Series, Part 2: Coverage for Smoke-Related Damages

    White and Williams LLP Secures Affirmation of Denial to Change Trial Settings Based on Plaintiffs’ Failure to Meet the Texas Causation Standard for Asbestos Cases

    Allegations That COVID-19 Was Physically Present and Altered Property are Sufficient to Sustain COVID-19 Business Interruption Suit

    Just Because You Label It A “Trade Secret” Does Not Make It A “Trade Secret”

    Presenting a “Total Time” Delay Claim Is Not Sufficient

    The Fourth Circuit Applies a Consequential Damages Exclusionary Clause and the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Claims by a Subrogating Insurer Seeking to Recover Over $19 Million in Damages

    Wisconsin Court Applies the Economic Loss Doctrine to Bar Negligence Claims for Purely Economic Losses

    Concrete Worker Wins Lawsuit and Settles with Other Defendant
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Seattle's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Progress, Property, and Privacy: Discussing Human-Led Infrastructure with Jeff Schumacher

    August 30, 2021 —
    We sat down with Jeff Schumacher, Microsoft’s Global Workplace Services Regional Lead Ireland, UK, and MEA, in the run-up to his keynote speech at WDBE 2021. Our conversation covered how technical innovation has changed the sector, the dangers of assumption, and why retaining a human-centred perspective is vital in a data-driven business. As we leave lockdown, the conversation shifts from measuring the impact on society to the positive change that our urban spaces and built environment can provide. But when it comes to contemporary professional working spaces and the habits of the people working within them, it can be difficult to find a solution that works. 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

    Blueprint for Change: How the Construction Industry Should Respond to the FTC’s Ban on Noncompetes

    May 13, 2024 —
    In a groundbreaking move aimed at fostering fair competition and empowering workers, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule last week to ban noncompete agreements nationwide. This ruling may carry profound implications for the construction industry, prompting construction businesses to reassess their practices and ensure compliance while maintaining competitiveness. Let’s explore how construction companies, large and small, can navigate this regulatory shift effectively. Noncompete clauses have long been a staple in employment contracts within the construction sector, often used to protect proprietary information and retain skilled talent. However, the FTC’s ban on noncompetes demands a reevaluation of these practices. Employers must recognize the potential consequences of noncompliance, including legal repercussions and reputational damage, and take proactive steps to adapt to the new regulatory landscape. Communications with Employees The FTC rule requires employers to provide a form notice of non-enforcement to all present and former employees subject to an unexpired noncompete provisions. However, given the immediate legal challenges to the FTC’s rule and the fact that the 120-day compliance window has not yet begun, there is no reason to take immediate action or begin notifying employees. Instead, business owners should wait for at least 60 days before taking concrete action in response to the rule to see if any court temporarily enjoins the effectiveness of the rule. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Matthew DeVries, Burr & Forman LLP
    Mr. DeVries may be contacted at mdevries@burr.com

    California’s High Speed Rail Project. Are We Done With the Drama?

    October 22, 2014 —
    Proponents of California’s high-speed rail project cleared a major hurdle this past week when the California Supreme Court declined to review a California Court of Appeals ruling which held that the state’s funding plan did not violate Proposition 1A, the voter-approved initiative passed in 2008, which provided initial funding for the project. For those like me who have been following the fits and starts of California’s high-speed rail project, it may be hard to remember how it all got started, and how we got to where we are. California's High-Speed Rail Project California’s high-speed rail project involves the construction of a high-speed passenger rail system running from Northern California to Southern California. The $68 billion system, expected to begin operation in 2029, will initially run from San Francisco to the Los Angeles basin in under 3 hours with train speeds capable of over 200 miles per hour. The system will eventually extend from Sacramento to San Diego covering a distance of approximately 800 miles with up to 24 stations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@kmtg.com

    2023’s Bank Failures: What Contractors, Material Suppliers and Equipment Lessors Can Do to Protect Themselves

    May 15, 2023 —
    It has been a tumultuous year for the banking industry. Since the beginning of this year the industry has seen the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, the shotgun marriage between failing Credit Suisse and USB, and, most recently, the collapse of First Republic Bank this past week and its purchase by JP Morgan Chase. Indeed, according to the New York Times, these three bank failures cum bailouts alone were bigger than the 25 banks that collapsed during the financial crises of 2008 and some are concerned that it is just the beginning. This, of course, has impacted the stock market, with Forbes reporting that the banking industry lost more than $300 billion in market value as of the end of March. However, it also raises concerns regarding liquidity on construction projects. While the failing banks have either been bought out by other banks or shored up by the federal government, which, in the case of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, involved the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve stepping into to protect depositors by guaranteeing deposits in excess of the current FDIC limit of $250,000, there continues to be concerns over access to cash. This can impact construction projects in several ways. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Garret Murai, Nomos LLP
    Mr. Murai may be contacted at gmurai@nomosllp.com

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    January 28, 2014 —
    On January 3rd of this year, Chad Abraham reported in the Aspen Daily News that the Ute City building—a condominium on Hopkins Avenue in Aspen, Colorado—“lacks proper entryways to apartments and a basement-level nightclub space for both tenants and the disabled.” The owners, Michael Sedoy and Natalia Shvachko, have been sued by the city after refusing “to allow access to an eastside staircase and elevator for other building residents and disabled patrons of a basement restaurant,” according to the Aspen Daily News. “Their stance has forced the other tenants and the disabled to use a westside, alleyway service entrance, according to the city.” Sedoy and Schvachko’s attorney retorts in court documents “that the city approved of a building map and declarations that allow access through the westside entry in the alley.” Furthermore, in another article by Abraham published in the Aspen Daily News on January 25th, he relates that the owners had filed more than “more than 30 noise complaints with the police and the city’s environmental health department about eateries and bars around their home on Restaurant Row. That led to a trial for the Aspen Brewing Co., which a jury acquitted in about 10 minutes last week.” In addition, the couple is being sued by Mountain Home Window Fashions, the Ute City building general contractor. According to the lawsuit as reported by the Daily Aspen News, Mountain Home claims they are owed $12,332. The owners have counter-sued, alleging “that there were defects in Mountain Home Window Fashions’ work” and that one of the employees “made unauthorized charges on Sedoy’s credit card.” Read the full story, January 3rd article ... Read the full story, January 25th article ... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Texas Central Wins Authority to Take Land for High-Speed Rail System

    October 03, 2022 —
    Move over luxury bus lines and quick flights. Central Texans should be on the lookout for bulldozers and train stops. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of Texas held that Texas Central Railroad & Infrastructure, Inc. and related entities (collectively “Texas Central”) have eminent domain authority to acquire property for a proposed high-speed rail system between Dallas and Houston.[1] Specifically, the Court held that the corporation qualifies as an “interurban electric railway company” under the Texas Transportation Code. This ruling grants Texas Central the broad condemnation authority to procure land for the project. Texas Central has Statutory Authority to Take Land The plaintiff in the matter, a farm owner with property south of Dallas along the proposed path of the bullet train, challenged the companies power to condemn land. The landowner’s declaratory judgment action challenged Texas Central’s eminent-domain authority. Under Texas law, condemnation power must be conferred by the legislature, either expressly or by necessary implication.[2] Here, Texas Central was created for the purpose of constructing, acquiring, maintaining, or operating lines of electric railway between Texas municipalities. The Court found that Texas Central is engaged in activities to further that purpose. Therefore, the Court concluded, that although legislators did not contemplate high-speed railways at the time of drafting the Transportation Code, Texas Central nonetheless qualified as “interurban electric railway companies” under the statute. Reprinted courtesy of Barclay Nicholson, Sheppard Mullin and Erica Gibbons, Sheppard Mullin Mr. Nicholson may be contacted at bnicholson@sheppardmullin.com Ms. Gibbons may be contacted at egibbons@sheppardmullin.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Appeals Court Affirms Carrier’s Duty to Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured in Construction Defect Suit

    November 03, 2016 —
    One of the key reasons for builders to maintain liability insurance is to cover the cost of hiring defense counsel and paying litigation costs in the event of a construction defect lawsuit. If a builder loses a lawsuit, it will typically be responsible for paying the plaintiff’s litigation costs. Today, the Colorado Court of Appeals clarified that the “supplementary payments” section of a standard Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance policy covers such costs, even if the carrier has reserved the right to dispute whether it has a duty to indemnify the actual damages awarded. This may seem counter-intuitive, insofar as a carrier may owe costs even if it does not cover the underlying loss, but the court’s decision is consistent with the plain language of the CGL form that most carriers use. Reprinted courtesy of Jesse Howard Witt, The Witt Law Firm Mr. Witt may be contacted at his website www.witt.law Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    October 25, 2013 —
    Construction Lawyers, LLP has announced that it has settled two Florida construction defect suits, both of which were filed by condominium associations. The first of these involved the Estates at Park Central Condominium Association, a 244-unit condominium complex in Orlando Florida. The condominium association alleged leaks into balconies and garages, and deficiencies in stucco application. After nearly three years since the filing of the lawsuit, and only weeks before the trial was to begin, the case was settled for $2 million. The second case has also spent the last three years in mediation, however its trial date was further away. The Grand Venezia Condominium Owners Association alleged construction defects including leaking roofs and windows, and improperly installed stucco, leading to dry rot and water damage. The condominium community comprises 336 units in Clearwater, Florida and the units were originally built as apartments. Here, the settlement with the contractor was for $2.75 million. A lawsuit against the developer continues. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of