BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    institutional building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington consulting general contractorSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildingsSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington architectural engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expertsSeattle Washington architect expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim 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


    KB Homes Sues Condo Buyers over Alleged Cybersquatting and Hacking

    The Heat Is On

    Additional Insured Not Entitled to Indemnity Coverage For Damage Caused by Named Insured

    Arizona Court Determines Statute of Limitations Applicable to a Claim for Reformation of a Deed of Trust (and a Related Claim for Declaratory Judgment)

    General Partner Is Not Additional Insured For Construction Defect Claim

    Hunton Insurance Practice Receives Top (Tier 1) National Ranking by US News & World Report

    Do Municipal Gas Bans Slow the Clean Hydrogen Transition in Real Estate?

    Work without Permits may lead to Problems Later

    Insurer Rejects Claim on Dolphin Towers

    Express Warranty Trumping Spearin’s Implied Warranty

    Manhattan Developer Wants Claims Dismissed in Breach of Contract Suit

    Library to Open with Roof Defect Lawsuit Pending

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Strikes a Deathblow to Substantial Factor Causation in Most Cases; Is Asbestos Litigation Next?

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Georgia Court Reaffirms Construction Defect Decision

    BHA has a Nice Swing: Firm Supports CDCCF Charity at 2014 WCC Seminar

    Building Stagnant in Las Cruces Region

    Fee Simple!

    The Court of Appeals Holds That Indifference to Safety Satisfies the Standard for a Willful Violation Under WISHA

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “It’s None of Your Business.”

    Attorneys' Fees Awarded as Part of "Damages Because of Property Damage"

    Fast-Moving Isaias Dishes Out Disruption in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast

    Deck Collapse Raises Questions about Building Defects

    The Need to Be Specific and Precise in Drafting Settling Agreements

    Vallagio v. Metropolitan Homes: Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Declarant Consent Provision to Amend Arbitration Out of Declarations

    The Increasing Trend of Caps in Construction Contracts and Negotiating Them

    Vermont Supreme Court Reverses, Finding No Coverage for Collapse

    Connecting IoT Data to BIM

    Miller Act Claim for Unsigned Change Orders

    Flood Policy Does Not Cover Debris Removal from Property

    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms

    Lien Actions Versus Lien Foreclosure Actions

    Diggin’ Ain’t Easy: Remember to Give Notice Before You Excavate in California

    What to Know Before Building a Guesthouse

    Flint Water Suits Against Engineers Will Go to Trial, Judge Says

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Chicago Criticized for Not Maintaining Elevator Inspections

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    Waiving The Right to Arbitrate Under Federal Law

    Double-Wide World Cup Seats Available to 6-Foot, 221-Pound Fans

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    Tiny Houses Big With U.S. Owners Seeking Economic Freedom

    When a Construction Lender Steps into the Shoes of the Developer, the Door is Open for Claims by the General Contractor

    Newmeyer Dillion Announces Jessica Garland as Its Newest Partner

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Fair Share Act Does Not Preempt Common Law When Apportioning Liability

    Is Privity of Contract with the Owner a Requirement of a Valid Mechanic’s Lien? Not for GC’s

    Washington State Updates the Contractor Registration Statute

    Pre-Judgment Interest Not Awarded Under Flood Policy

    Falling Tree Causing Three Injuries/Deaths Is One Occurrence
    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

    Arbitration—No Opportunity for Appeal

    October 22, 2014 —
    Last week I presented to the Great Plains Chapter of the American Society of Professional Estimators on arbitration and litigation. Some of the questions related to the difficulty of appealing an arbitrator’s decision. A Florida appellate court recently confirmed this difficulty. In Village at Dolphin Commerce Center, LLC v. Construction Service Solutions, LLC, a contractor filed an arbitration claim against the owner to get paid for its work. The owner claimed that the contractor could not maintain the claim to get paid because the contractor was not licensed. Apparently, there is a law in Florida that a contractor unlicensed at the time of the contract cannot maintain an action in Florida for unpaid work. 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

    Ninth Circuit Court Weighs In On Insurance Coverage For COVID-19 Business Interruption Losses

    October 11, 2021 —
    On October 1, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on a trio of cases involving COVID-19 business interruption losses, in a series of written opinions with results favoring the insurers. Despite the slate of wins for insurers in this round of cases, these rulings are limited to cases where policyholders either did not allege the presence of COVID-19 on their premises causing “physical alteration” of the property itself, or had a virus exclusion in their policy, or both. This leaves room for future cases potentially ruling in favor of coverage where the insureds allege the presence of coronavirus on the premises, and that there was a detrimental physical alteration of the property as a result. To date, the Ninth Circuit has not ruled on such a situation. RULING 1: Mudpie v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Co. of America The Ninth Circuit first considered a proposed class action brought by a children’s store operator, Mudpie. Mudpie sought business income and extra expense coverage from Travelers after California and local authorities issued shutdown orders impacting Mudpie’s operations due to COVID-19. (Mudpie, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America, Case No. 20-16858, --- F.4th --- (9th Cir. Oct. 1, 2021).) Travelers denied coverage, asserting that the claim did not involve “direct physical loss of or damage to” property “caused by or resulting from a covered Cause of Loss.” Travelers also denied coverage under language excluding “loss or damage caused by or resulting from any virus…that induces…physical distress, illness or disease.” Applying California law, the trial court agreed with Travelers on both accounts. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Rondi J. Walsh, Newmeyer Dillion
    Ms. Walsh may be contacted at rondi.walsh@ndlf.com

    Fifth Circuit Requires Causal Distinction for Ensuing Loss Exception to Faulty Work Exclusion

    August 29, 2022 —
    In Balfour Beatty v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals provided valuable insight on coverage available through ensuing loss exceptions to faulty work and design exclusions in builder’s risk insurance policies. In Balfour Beatty, the Court held that, in order to establish coverage through an ensuing loss exception, the ensuing loss must be causally distinct from the original excluded loss.1 Balfour Beatty, serving as general contractor for construction of a commercial office building in Houston, Texas, subcontracted with Milestone for steelwork on the project. As part of this work, Milestone welded a 2-inch metal plate to external tubing on the eighteenth floor of the building. While welding the plate in place, welding slag fell down the side of the building, damaging exterior glass windows on the floors below. Balfour Beatty and Milestone, along with the developer, sought coverage for the damage to the windows under their builder’s risk policy, issued by Liberty Mutual. Liberty Mutual denied coverage, claiming that the damage was excluded by the policy’s “Defects, Errors, and Omissions” exclusion. The insureds sued, arguing that the ensuing loss exception to this exclusion would carve back coverage because the damage to the windows constituted an “ensuing loss.” Reprinted courtesy of Avery J. Cantor, Saxe Doernberger & Vita and William S. Bennett, Saxe Doernberger & Vita Mr. Cantor may be contacted at ACantor@sdvlaw.com Mr. Bennett may be contacted at WBennett@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 – Expert Testimony

    October 30, 2023 —
    In April, the Supreme Court sent a list of proposed amendments to Congress that amend the Federal Rules of Evidence. Absent action by Congress, the rules go into effect December 1, 2023. The proposed amendments affect Rules 106, 615 and, relevant to this article, 702. Rule 702 addresses testimony by an expert witness. The proposed rule reads as follows (new material is underlined; matters omitted are lined through): A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that:
    1. the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
    2. the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
    3. the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
    4. the expert has reliably applied expert’s opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of William L. Doerler, White and Williams LLP
    Mr. Doerler may be contacted at doerlerw@whiteandwilliams.com

    Occurrence Definition Trends Analyzed

    August 27, 2014 —
    In The Legal Intelligencer, Gordon S. Woodward, partner at Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, analyzed the changing definition of occurrence in the insurance industry, and more specifically in Pennsylvania. Woodward begins by going over “the traditional view of occurrence as it relates to coverage for faulty products or defective work,” in which “the existence of a defect in a product or an event in which a defective product injures only itself does not constitute an occurrence.” However, he stated that “there is a growing trend in favor of finding that an occurrence can include the circumstance where defective work results in damage only to the work or product itself (so long as the damage was neither intended nor expected by the insured).” Woodward also explained Pennsylvania developments and legislative changes (such as a South Carolina statute). These changes need to be monitored, Woodward stated, “as they have the potential to dramatically alter the coverage landscape from one jurisdiction to the next.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Conflict in Successive Representation of a Closely-Held Company and Its Insiders Where Insiders Already Possess Company’s Confidential Information

    August 02, 2017 —
    In Beachcomber Management Crystal Cove, LLC v. Superior Court (Salisbury) (No. G054078, filed June 28, 2017; pub. and mod. order July 28, 2017), the Fourth Appellate District granted a writ of mandate vacating a trial court’s order disqualifying defendants’ counsel. In Beachcomber, plaintiffs filed a shareholder derivative action against defendants Beachcomber Management and Douglas Cavanaugh (collectively, “defendants”) alleging defendants abused their position and mismanaged nominal defendant and similarly named Beachcomber at Crystal Cove (“Beachcomber”). Between 2009 and 2011, defendants and Beachcomber had each hired Kohut & Kohut LLP (“Kohut”) to represent them on at least four different occasions. In the underlying action, defendants hired Kohut again to represent them, while Beachcomber hired another law firm to represent it. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys Renata L. Hoddinott, David W. Evans and Howard M. Garfield Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    2019 Legislative Changes Affecting the Construction Industry

    July 09, 2019 —
    The 2019 Florida Legislative Session recently concluded and a number of important construction-related House Bills (HB) and Senate Bills (SB) were presented during the Session. Below is a summary of those construction-related bills set to become law in 2019. Bills Becoming Law in 2019 HB 1247: Relating to Construction Bonds. This bill passed both the House and the Senate and is awaiting the Governor’s signature. Once the Governor has approved the bill it becomes effective as of October 1, 2019. This bill addresses how to properly perfect a claim against a contractor’s payment bond. (1) The Notice of Nonpayment that must be served on the contractor and the surety, must be made under oath and include the following provisions: The nature of the labor or services performed or to be performed; The materials furnished or to be furnished; The amount paid on the account; and if known, the amount owed and the amount to become due. A Notice of Nonpayment that includes the sums for retainage must specify the portion of the amount claimed for retainage. (2) A subcontractor, laborer, or material supplier (claimant) who files a fraudulent Notice of Nonpayment loses their rights under the bond. The filing of a fraudulent notice is a complete defense to claimant’s claim against the bond. A notice is fraudulent if the claimant willfully exaggerated the amount due, willfully included a claim for work not performed or materials not furnished or prepared the notice with willful and gross negligence, which resulted in willful exaggeration. However, a minor mistake in the notice, or a good faith dispute as to the amount due, is not considered fraudulent. Please note that this provision mirrors the existing statute relative to a fraudulent lien. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melinda S. Gentile, Peckar & Abramson, P.C.
    Ms. Gentile may be contacted at mgentile@pecklaw.com

    Timely and Properly Assert Affirmative Defenses and Understand Statutory Conditions Precedent

    August 05, 2024 —
    A recent case serves as a reminder to TIMELY and PROPERLY assert affirmative defenses and to understand statutory conditions precedent to construction lien claims. Failing to do one or the other could be severely detrimental to the position you want to take in a dispute, whether it is a lien foreclosure dispute, or any other dispute. In Scherf v. Tom Krips Construction, Inc., 2024 WL 3297592 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024), the president of a construction company and his wife were building a residence. They orally accepted the proposal from the concrete shell contractor and asked for invoices to be submitted to the president’s construction company. No written contract was memorialized. The president and his wife did not pay the concrete shell contractor and the contractor recorded a lien and sued to foreclose on the lien. Years later (the case had been stayed because the president and his wife filed for bankruptcy and the shell contractor had to get leave of the automatic bankruptcy stay to pursue the lien foreclosure), the shell contractor moved for summary judgment. The president and his wife moved for leave to file an amended answer and affirmative defenses. They claimed the oral contract was with the construction company and the shell contractor was required to serve a Notice to Owner under Florida Statute s. 713.06. Alternatively, they argued that if the oral contract was with the president and his wife, the shell contractor was required to serve a Final Contractor’s Payment Affidavit at least 5 days before filing its lien foreclosure claim, and did not, as required by s. 713.06. 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