BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington architect expert witnessSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessesSeattle 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


    The Practical Distinction Between Anticipatory Breach and Repudiation and How to Deal with Both on Construction Projects

    The Three L’s of Real Estate Have New, Urgent Meaning

    Code Changes Pave Way for CLT in Tall Buildings and Spark Flammability Debate

    Haight Celebrates 2024 New Partner Promotions!

    Florida trigger

    Home-Sales Fall in 2014 Has U.S. Waiting for 2015: Economy

    My Employees Could Have COVID-19. What Now?

    Not All Work is Covered Under the Federal Miller Act

    Insurer's Quote on Coverage for Theft by Hacker Creates Issue of Fact

    New Washington Law Nixes Unfair Indemnification in Construction Contracts

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

    Building Materials Price Increase Clause for Contractors and Subcontractors – Three Options

    Former Mayor Arrested for Violating Stop Work Order

    The Great Fallacy: If Builders Would Just Build It Right There Would Be No Construction Defect Litigation

    California Assembly Bill Proposes an End to Ten Year Statute of Repose

    Canada’s Largest Homebuilder Sets U.S. Growth Plan

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    Oregon Duty to Defend Triggered by Potential Timing of Damage

    Tishman Construction Admits Cheating Trade Center Clients

    Las Vegas Student Housing Developer Will Name Replacement Contractor

    NYC Developer Embraces Religion in Search for Condo Sites

    Don’t Ignore a Notice of Contest of Lien

    New Opportunities for “Small” Construction Contractors as SBA Adjusts Its Size Standards Again Due to Unprecedented Inflation

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team for Prevailing on a Highly Contested Motion to Quash!

    State Farm Too Quick To Deny Coverage, Court Rules

    New York Court Holds Radioactive Materials Exclusion Precludes E&O Coverage for Negligent Phase I Report

    Seattle Expands Bridge Bioswale Projects

    In Texas, a General Contractor May be Liable in Tort to a Third-Party Lessee for Property Damage Caused by a Subcontractor’s Work

    Construction Defect Suit Can Continue Against Plumber

    World's Longest Suspension Bridge Takes Shape in Turkey

    AIA Releases Decennial 2017 Updates to its Contracts Suites

    “Unwinnable”: Newark Trial Team Obtains Unanimous “No Cause” Verdict in Challenging Matter on Behalf of NYC Mutual Housing Association

    Biggest U.S. Gas Leak Followed Years of Problems, State Says

    Construction of World's Tallest Building to Resume With New $1.9B Contract for Jeddah Tower

    The Problem With Building a New City From Scratch

    Bay Area Counties Issue Less Restrictive “Shelter in Place” Orders, Including for Construction

    BWB&O Expands to North San Diego

    The Pitfalls of Oral Agreements in the Construction Industry

    Caution to GCs! An Exception to Privette Can Leave You Open to Liability

    Watchdog Opens Cartel Probe Into Eight British Homebuilders

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Federal Government May Go to Different Green Building Standard

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect, Bad Faith Claims

    New ANSI Requirements for Fireplace Screens

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    How Do You Get to the Five Year Mark? Some Practical Advice

    Slowing Home Sales Show U.S. Market Lacks Momentum: Economy

    Small Airport to Grow with Tower

    Legal Matters Escalate in Aspen Condo Case

    Court Rejects Anti-SLAPP Motion in Construction Defect Suit
    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. Leveraging 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

    Protect Against Design Errors With Owners Protective Professional Indemnity Coverage

    March 14, 2018 —
    Prior to the devastation caused by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, the AIA Consensus Construction Forecast had predicted “slower growth for the construction industry for the remainder of 2017 and through 2018.” But, given the hundreds of billions of dollars in damages caused by these horrific events, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, estimates a lift to the economy through the rebuilding of these areas. This, of course, is dependent on insurer funds and the amount of aid offered through government sources. Nonetheless, the process will be costly, timely and exhaustive. Under such circumstances, speed is a necessity. In addition to being drawn into the earliest stages of the project development cycle, the services of construction professionals have merged so intensely that even their “consultative advice” have produced exposures in “collaborative” environments rife with liability. A challenge for contractors in today’s design/build marketplace is securing professional liability insurance policies that will not only manage the risks associated with their own errors and omissions, but also the problems caused by designers and others contracted to work on the project. However, this too is not very easy. Such policies when purchased by contractors can be exceedingly cost prohibitive. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Joseph Nawa, Construction Executive, a Publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All Rights Reserved
    Mr. Nawa may be contacted at joseph.nawa@newdayunderwriting.com

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

    February 03, 2020 —
    In T-Mobile USA Inc. v. Selective Ins. Co. of Am., 450 P.3d 150 (Wash. 2019) the Washington Supreme Court addressed whether an insurance company is bound by its agent’s written representation—made in a certificate of insurance—that a particular corporation is an additional insured under a given policy. The question arose in a case where: (1) the Ninth Circuit had already ruled that the agent acted with apparent authority, but (2) the agent’s representation turned out to be inconsistent with the policy and (3) the certificate of insurance included additional text broadly disclaiming the certificate’s ability to “amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by” the policy. According to the Court, under Washington law the answer is yes: an insurance company is bound by the representation of its agent in those circumstances. Otherwise, the Court reasoned, an insurance company’s representations would be meaningless and it could mislead without consequence. At the heart of this case were two T-Mobiles entities: T-Mobile USA and T-Mobile Northeast (“T-Mobile NE”), which were distinct legal entities. T-Mobile NE engaged a contractor to construct a cell phone tower on a rooftop in New York City. The contract between T-Mobile NE and the contractor required the contractor to obtain a general liability insurance policy, to annually provide T-Mobile NE “with certificates of insurance evidencing [that policy’s] coverage,” and to name T-Mobile NE as an additional insured under the policy. T-Mobile USA was not a party to the contract, but was nonetheless aware of it and approved the contract as to form. The contractor obtained the required insurance policy from Selective. The policy provided that a third party would automatically become an “additional insured” under the policy if the contractor and the third party entered into their own contract that required the contractor to add the third party to its insurance policy as an additional insured. Because T-Mobile USA did not have a contract with the contractor, it did not automatically become an additional insured under the policy. Nevertheless, over the course of several years, Selective’s agent issued a series of certificates of insurance to “T-Mobile USA Inc., its Subsidiaries and Affiliates” that stated that those entities were “included as an additional insured [under the policy] with respect to” certain areas of coverage. The agent signed those certificates as Selective’s “Authorized Representative.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jason Taylor, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Taylor may be contacted at jtaylor@tlsslaw.com

    North Carolina Appeals Court Threatens Long-Term Express Warranties

    April 09, 2014 —
    Jonathan Massell of the firm Nexsen Pruet explained how a “recent holding by the North Carolina Court of Appeals is threatening to render many long-term express warranties ineffective,” in the online publication Lexology. In Christie v. Hartley Construction, Inc., “the court held that the six-year North Carolina statute of repose for improvements to real property trumps the bargained-for duration terms of an express warranty.” In the Christie case, this meant that even though the homeowners had a twenty year warranty, because of the statute of repose, the warranty effectively expired after six years. Massell stated to “be mindful of jurisdiction.” If the express warranty is in a state other than North Carolina, it’s possible that the claim could be filed in that state instead of North Carolina. For instance, according to Massell, South Carolina’s “statue of repose does not expire until eight years after the date of substantial completion for an improvement to real property.” Furthermore, “long-term warranties are not trumped by the South Carolina statute of repose.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    City of Birmingham Countersues Contractor for Incomplete Work

    March 12, 2014 —
    Back in December of 2013, WVTM News reported that Chris Woods, a contractor, filed a lawsuit against the City of Birmingham, Alabama, demanding $1.5 million for the West Police Precinct and two other projects he had been contracted on. However, “Birmingham claimed Woods was fired for not completing projects on time and other contract breaches.” On March 7th, WVTM News reported that the City of Birmingham has filed a counterclaim against Woods, alleging that he “owes $1.2 million for incomplete work.” The city listed his “inability to meet specific construction deadlines and finish either project on time as factors for his termination.” Woods, however, blamed the city for delays, citing multiple design changes requested by Birmingham. The city’s counterclaim also alleged that “Star Insurance Company, ‘identified major, numerous defects in the work that Woods had performed prior to the termination of the West Precinct Project.’” Read the full story, December 2013 Article... Read the full story, March 2014 Article... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Dear Engineer: Has your insurer issued a “Reservation of Rights” letter? (law note)

    April 20, 2017 —
    In my previous post, I made reference to getting a “Reservation of Rights” letter. I noted that the carrier may decide to defend you under a Reservation of Rights (i.e., hire your lawyer) but may not, necessarily, accept the responsibility for paying the claim. Does this mean that the insurance company has denied your claim, or will never pay? No. Reservation of Rights (ROR) letters are sent for a variety of reasons- most notably, when some portion of the construction lawsuit against you is not covered under your E&O policy. The letter must state the reason(s) that the ROR is being issued. With the ROR, the insurance company is telling you that it reserves the right to withdraw from your defense and/or deny payment of damages at a later date, depending upon how facts in the case develop. The notice is intended to let you know that there *may* be issues later, and to put you notice that you have the right to hire your own lawyer (at your own expense) to protect yourself from that future potential risk. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC
    Ms. Brumback may be contacted at mbrumback@rl-law.com

    Crane Firm Pulled Off NYC Projects Following Multiple Incidents

    October 07, 2019 —
    Following a partial crane collapse at a site on Manhattan’s Lower East Side and a fatality in April on a jobsite in lower Manhattan, the New York City Dept. of Buildings announced on Aug. 12 that it is suspending United Crane & Rigging’s work on 21 construction sites across the city. Jeff Rubenstone, Engineering News-Record Mr. Rubenstone may be contacted at rubenstonej@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Finds Wrap-Up Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage of Additional Insureds

    February 18, 2020 —
    The United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, recently took a close look at the application of a “controlled insurance program exclusion” (wrap-up exclusion) to additional insureds on a commercial general liability policy. In Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 886 F.3d 366 (4th Cir. 2018), the Fourth Circuit examined the interplay of an enrolled party’s additional insured status on an unenrolled party’s commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy with a wrap-up exclusion. The court applied North Carolina law and found that pursuant to the policy’s own language, the exclusion only applied to the original named insured, not the additional insureds. The case arose out of an injury incurred by an employee of a second-tier subcontractor during the construction of a hospital. On this particular project, the owner maintained a “rolling owner controlled insurance program” (wrap-up insurance program) in which all tiers of contractors were required to enroll, but enrollment was not automatic. The general contractor was enrolled in the owner’s wrap-up policy, but neither the steel manufacturer subcontractor nor its sub-subcontractor, the steel installation company, were enrolled. The underlying plaintiff was injured while he was an employee of the steel installation company, but he did not name his employer in his personal injury lawsuit. The Cont’l Cas. Co. case was instituted by Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) after it defended and settled the underlying plaintiff’s claims against its insured and additional insured, the steel manufacturer and general contractor, respectively. Continental sought to be reimbursed for the $1.7 million settlement and attorneys’ fees and costs incurred for the defense and indemnity of the underlying lawsuit. Continental alleged that Amerisure Insurance Company (“Amerisure”) breached its duty to defend and Amerisure’s policy provided the primary coverage for both the general contractor and steel manufacturer, who were additional insureds on the Amerisure policy. Amerisure denied a duty to defend the additional insureds based on the presence of the wrap-up exclusion. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ryan M. Charlson, Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.
    Mr. Charlson may be contacted at Ryan.Charlson@csklegal.com

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    February 26, 2015 —
    (Bloomberg) -- David Lichtenstein, whose real estate company owned Extended Stay Hotels when the chain went bankrupt, is committing $2 billion to developing and investing in lodging properties. Lightstone Group is choosing “top-branded” select-service properties, those with limited amenities, in proven U.S. markets for its projects, Lichtenstein said in an interview. As part of the strategy, Lightstone has teamed up with Marriott International Inc. to build five Moxy hotels in New York -- four in Manhattan and one in Brooklyn. The “micro” lodgings, with high-tech features and smaller-than-average rooms, are geared toward younger travelers. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nadja Brandt, Bloomberg
    Ms. Brandt may be contacted at nbrandt@bloomberg.net