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


    A Game of Texas Hold’em: How Texas Stopped Wage Increases for Salaried Exempt Employees Nationwide

    Ohio “property damage” caused by an “occurrence.”

    Filing Motion to Increase Lien Transfer Bond (Before Trial Court Loses Jurisdiction Over Final Judgment)

    Illinois Favors Finding Construction Defects as an Occurrence

    Robinson+Cole’s Amicus Brief Adopted and Cited by Massachusetts’s High Court

    The Hunton Policyholder’s Guide to Artificial Intelligence: SEC’s Recent AI-Washing Claims Present D&O Risks, Potential Coverage Challenges

    Liebherr Claims Crane Not Cause of Brazil Stadium Construction Accident

    Lorelie S. Masters Nominated for Best in Insurance & Reinsurance for the Women in Business Law Awards 2021

    Federal Court Denies Summary Judgment in Leaky Condo Conversion

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    Court Confirms No Duty to Reimburse for Prophylactic Repairs Prior to Actual Collapse

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (11/8/23) – New Handling of Homelessness, Decline in Investments into ESG Funds, and Shrinking of a Homebuyer’s Dollar

    Court of Appeals Upholds Default Judgment: Serves as Reminder to Respond to Lawsuits in a Timely Manner

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    MTA Implements Revised Contractors Debarment Regulations

    Conversations with My Younger Self: 5 Things I Wish I Knew Then

    Texas Supreme Court Defines ‘Plaintiff’ in 3rd-Party Claims Against Design Professionals

    Henderson Engineers Tests AI for Building Systems Design with Torch.AI

    Future Environmental Rulemaking Proceedings Listed in the Spring 2019 Unified Federal Agenda

    Travelers’ 3rd Circ. Win Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure

    Bill Introduced to give Colorado Shortest Statute of Repose in U.S.

    Home Prices Expected to Increase All Over the U.S.

    Buy America/Buy American, a Primer For Contractors

    Massachusetts Pulls Phased Trigger On Its Statute of Repose

    Record Keeping—the Devil’s in the Details

    SkenarioLabs Uses AI for Property Benchmarking

    Micropiles for bad soil: a Tarheel victory

    Priority of Liability Insurance Coverage and Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion

    The Miller Act: More Complex than You Think

    It’s Getting Harder and Harder to be a Concrete Supplier in California

    Housing to Top Capital Spending in Next U.S. Growth Leg: Economy

    PATH Station Designed by Architect Known for Beautiful Structures, Defects, and Cost Overruns

    How AI Can Become a Design Adviser

    Landlord Duties of Repair and Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

    The Courts and Changing Views on Construction Defect Coverage

    State Farm to Build Multi-Use Complex in Dallas Area

    China Home Glut May Worsen as Developers Avoid Price Drop

    U.S. Homebuilder Confidence Rises Most in Almost a Year

    Manhattan Townhouse Sells for a Record $79.5 Million

    Business and Professions Code Section 7031, Demurrers, and Just How Much You Can Dance

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Insurer's Refusal to Consider Supplemental Claim Found Improper

    Performance Bond Primer: Need to Knows and Need to Dos

    U.S. Tornadoes, Hail Cost Insurers $1 Billion in June

    What Makes a Great Lawyer?

    3M PFAS Water Settlement Could Reach $12.5B

    Wearable Ways to Work in Extreme Heat

    Another Colorado City Passes Construction Defects Ordinance

    Fire Tests Inspire More Robust Timber Product Standard

    Payment Bond Claim Notice Requires More than Mailing
    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

    SFAA Commends Congress for Maintaining Current Bonding Protection Levels in National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

    December 20, 2021 —
    December 15, 2021 (WASHINGTON, DC) – The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA), a nonprofit, nonpartisan trade association representing all segments of the surety and fidelity industry, commends the U.S. Senate and House for passing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2022, and including Section 877, which exempts the Miller Act from periodic indexing for inflation. SFAA would like to thank Miller Act exemption bill sponsors, Representatives Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Byron Donalds (R-FL), as well as Senators Robert Portman (R-OH), Gary Peters (D-MI) and Mazie Hirono (D-HI), for their leadership and commitment on the passage of this bill. Exempting the Miller Act from periodic indexing for inflation ensures essential payment protections remain in place for subcontractors, suppliers, and workers on all federal construction contracts subject to the Miller Act. The exemption also ensures performance protections for taxpayers will remain in place on federal construction contracts of $150,000 and more. For over 80 years, the federal Miller Act has protected taxpayers against risk of loss by requiring payment and performance bonds on federal construction contracts. President Biden is expected to sign the NDAA into law in the coming days. The Surety & Fidelity Association of America (SFAA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan trade association representing all segments of the surety and fidelity industry. Based in Washington, D.C., SFAA works to promote the value of surety and fidelity bonding by proactively advocating on behalf of its members and stakeholders. The association’s more than 450 member companies write 98 percent of surety and fidelity bonds in the U.S. For more information visit www.surety.org. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Oregon Construction Firm Sued for Construction Defects

    July 31, 2013 —
    Home Forward, the housing authority in Multnomah County, Oregon, is suing Tom Walsh & Company over allegations of construction defects in low-income housing projects the firm built for the county. Walsh’s firm was hired about ten years ago to construct apartments in Portland and adjacent Gresham. But the housing authority claims that the buildings are suffering water damage. The authority requested that Tom Walsh & Company repair the problems. Walsh claimed that the problems were not due to construction defects, but to the agency’s failure to maintain the properties. Home Forward has gone forward with lawsuits of a combined $3.8 million. If the case goes to trial, according to Walsh, it will be only the second time for him in 50 years of business. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    July 25, 2022 —
    Interpreting Connecticut law, the federal district court had that the insured sub-contractor was entitled to a defense. County Wide Mech. Servs. LLC v. Regent Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86726 (D. Conn. May 13, 2022). The underlying plaintiff, The Saybrook at Haddam, entered a contract with PAC Group to serve as general contractor for construction of an addition to The Saybrook's facility. PAC Group sub-contracted with County Wide Mechanical Services to install the HVAC system. The HVAC system was put into service on November 14, 2014. In October 2019, The Saybrook filed the underlying action against PAC group, County Wide, and others. The underlying complaint alleged that there had been at least seven "critical failures" of the HVAC system. As a result, The Seabrook had to replace multiple compressors and several circuit boards, valves, and other components. Further, the entire system had to be replaced. The underlying complaint alleged breach of contract against PAC Group and County Wide. In addition to the alleged breach of contract between The Saybrook and County Wide, the Saybrook also alleged it was a third-party beneficiary of PAC Group's contract with County Wide regarding installation of the HVAC system. PAC Group cross-claimed against County Wide, asserting one count of contractual indemnification and one count of breach of contract under the PAC Group's contract with County Wide. 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

    Construction Litigation Roundup: “Wrap Music to an Insurer’s Ears?”

    February 05, 2024 —
    The general contractor on a New Orleans condominium construction project obtained a Contractor Controlled Insurance Program/CCIP policy or "Wrap-Up" policy for the job. An accident occurred on the job when a construction elevator/hoist fell, injuring several workers. The elevator/hoist was provided by a subcontractor, pursuant to a rental agreement and related subcontract with the general contractor. Contained within the subcontract was a provision which states that the general contractor "has arranged for the Project to be insured under a controlled insurance program (the "CCIP" or "WrapUp"),” and that the CCIP shall provide "commercial general liability insurance and excess liability insurance, in connection with the performance of the Work at the Project site." A third-party administrator for the wrap-up policy had been in communication with the subcontractor prior to the commencement of the work, “specifically advising that insurance coverage was not automatic” and providing the subcontractor with an enrollment form for the CCIP. Ultimately, the subcontractor “declined to comply with the request,” stating that the subcontractor would "not participate in paying any wrap insurance premiums" – because the subcontractor had its own insurance. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Daniel Lund III, Phelps
    Mr. Lund may be contacted at daniel.lund@phelps.com

    Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Update

    July 18, 2011 —

    Coverage of the ongoing litigation concerning the Harmon Hotel continues to proliferate. Architectural Record and a number of other news outlets continue to provide additional details and coverage of the matter. Chief among the conditions alleged are improperly installed reinforcing steel inside link beams on 15 floors. MGM Claims that the conditions amount to hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, while Perini (the builder) indicated in a July 12th statement that the buildings problems are related to the design, and the they are “fixable.”

    There is significant speculation that MGM Resorts International isn’t interested in repairing the hotel due to a glut of hotel rooms attendant to the troubled economy. In a statement Tuesday Perini reportedly stated that “Repairing and opening the Harmon would only create a greater glut of unused hotel rooms for MGM,” “If market conditions were better and MGM found that demand existed for the Harmon hotel rooms, MGM would not be claiming that the Harmon is unstable.”

    MGM asserts that Perini failed to ”properly construct” the project. Clark County’s Department of Development Services has reportedly asked MGM to provide a plan to fix the project by August 15th.

    The Harmon is part of the $8.5 billion CityCenter project that opened in the fourth quarter of 2009 and is jointly owned by MGM Resorts and Dubai World.

    Prior reports indicated that the owner (MGM) had considered razing the entire project. The future of the project remains uncertain.

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

    Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Calls for CFPB Investigation into Tenant Screening Businesses

    December 13, 2021 —
    Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, has written to newly confirmed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Rohit Chopra, asking him to review companies in the tenant screening industry for possible Fair Credit Reporting Act violations and other violations of U.S. laws. The CFPB, for its part, has already published a bulletin alerting Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs) and other furnishers of consumer information that, as federal, state and local pandemic-related housing protections expire, the Bureau will be giving greater enforcement focus to these businesses’ compliance with accuracy and dispute obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Regulation V. While it is still unclear whether Director Chopra will direct the Bureau to investigate specific businesses flagged by Chairman Brown, the tenant screening industry will likely face increased scrutiny in the coming months, which may impact their service offerings and cause interruptions for landlords relying on these businesses and services. There are approximately 2,000 tenant screening companies across the United States. These companies are used by landlords to better identify and perform background checks on prospective tenants. These reports typically provide a prospective tenant’s rental and eviction histories, credit score, debt-to-income ratio, and outstanding credit obligations, among other financial metrics. The reports also usually include a criminal background check, including searches of sex offender registries and other public records searches. Many tenant screening companies then use this information to provide an estimate of the risk that each tenant presents, calculated through proprietary algorithmic formulas. These reports are usually available to landlords at a cost ranging from approximately $5 to $55 per report, usually passed through to the prospective tenant through application fees. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Brian H. Montgomery, Pillsbury
    Mr. Montgomery may be contacted at brian.montgomery@pillsburylaw.com

    Injury to Employees Endorsement Eliminates Coverage for Insured Employer

    February 01, 2021 —
    The court granted summary judgment to the insurer based upon an endorsement which barred coverage for injuries to employees. Northfield Ins. Co. v. Z&J Mgt. LLC, 2020 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10801 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Dec. 18, 2020). Ravi Sooklal sued his employer, Z&J Management LLC (Z&J), for injuries at the job site. Northfield, who had issued a CGL policy to Z&L, denied coverage based upon two endorsements. The first was titled "Injury to Employees of Insureds" and the second was "Employers' Liability." Northfield sued for a declaratory judgment and now moved for summary judgment. 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

    Estoppel Certificate? Estop and Check Your Lease

    May 06, 2019 —
    If you are leasing space in a building, there may come a time when you receive a request from your landlord to fill out and sign an estoppel certificate. Estoppel certificates are usually sent to tenants in connection with the sale or refinance of a building, and a third party may rely on the accuracy of the statements and information contained in the estoppel certificate in connection with that transaction. Estoppel certificates can range from a very simple, one-page document, to several pages. I’ve received an estoppel certificate in the mail. What do I do now? Consider the following: Check your lease. Your lease may require you to deliver the signed estoppel certificate and may even give you a timeframe within which you are required to return it. A form of estoppel certificate may also be included in your lease as an exhibit. If you’ve previously agreed to a form of estoppel certificate in your lease, check to ensure the one you have received matches the form you previously agreed to and if it doesn’t make sure to review it carefully to make sure it is acceptable. Review the estoppel certificate and confirm that all of the information is accurate. Be on the lookout for any terms or provisions that you did not agree to in your lease. If it seems like the landlord is trying to modify your lease, you likely do not need to consent to the change in this document. Cross off (or modify or delete, if you have an electronic copy) any information that is inaccurate. Fill in all blanks (if the blank is not applicable, write “N/A”), and if any exhibits are referenced in the body of the document, make sure they are actually attached. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lauren Podgorski, Snell & Wilmer
    Ms. Podgorski may be contacted at lpodgorski@swlaw.com