BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    parking structure building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington construction expert witnessesSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington building consultant expert
    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


    Supreme Court Holds That Prevailing Wage Statute is Constitutional

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    Waiving Workers’ Compensation Immunity for Indemnity: Demystifying a Common and Scary-Looking Contract Term

    Excess Insurer On The Hook For Cleanup Costs At Seven Industrial Sites

    CDJ’s #9 Topic of the Year: Nevada Supreme Court Denies Class Action Status in Construction Defect Case

    Navigating the Hurdles of Florida Construction Defect Lawsuits

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (05/10/23) – Wobbling Real Estate, Booming (and Busting) Construction, and Eye-Watering Insurance Premiums

    Former Hoboken, New Jersey Mayor Disbarred for Taking Bribes

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Third-Party Defendant

    Reasonable Expectations – Pennsylvania’s Case by Case Approach to the Sutton Rule

    Manhattan to Get Tall, Skinny Tower

    Surety Bond Producers Keep Eye Out For Illegal Waivers

    Toll Brothers Honored at the Shore Builders Association of Central New Jersey Awards

    Contractor Disputes Report Amid Amazon Warehouse Collapse Lawsuit

    Construction Law Breaking News: California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Beacon Residential Community Association

    Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks: The Spearin Doctrine and Design-Build Projects

    New York Court Finds Insurers Cannot Recover Defense Costs Where No Duty to Indemnify

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

    Skipping Depositions does not Constitute Failure to Cooperate in New York

    Construction May Begin with Documents, but It Shouldn’t End That Way

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (1/16/24) – Algorithms Affect the Rental Market, Robots Aim to Lower Construction Costs, and Gen Z Struggle to Find Their Own Space

    California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

    Construction Law Client Alert: California Is One Step Closer to Prohibiting Type I Indemnity Agreements In Private Commercial Projects

    Lay Testimony Sufficient to Prove Diminution in Value

    Is the Construction Industry Actually a Technology Hotbed?

    Let’s Give ‘Em Sutton to Talk About: Tennessee Court Enforces Sutton Doctrine

    Federal Court Enforces “Limits” and “Most We Will Pay” Clauses in Additional Insured Endorsement

    Beware of Statutory Limits on Change Orders

    Indiana Court Enforces Contract Provisions rather than Construction Drawing Markings

    Insurer Springs a Leak in Its Pursuit of Subrogation

    The Law Clinic Paves Way to the Digitalization of Built Environment Processes

    Toll Brothers Named #1 Home Builder on Fortune Magazine's 2023 World's Most Admired Companies® List

    White and Williams Celebrates 125th Anniversary

    Biden’s Buy American Policy & What it Means for Contractors

    Creative Avenue for Judgment Creditor to Collect a Judgment

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment on Faulty Workmanship Denied

    Case Dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment Granted for BWB&O’s Client in Wrongful Death Case!

    Newmeyer & Dillion Ranked Fourth Among Medium Sized Companies in 2016 OCBJ Best Places to Work List

    The Cross-Party Exclusion: The Hazards of Additional Named Insured Provisions

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Professional Services Exclusion in CGL Policies

    Floating Crane on Job in NYC's East River Has a Storied Past of Cold War Intrigue

    Expired Contract Not Revived Due to Sovereign Immunity and the Ex Contractu Clause

    Little Known Florida Venue Statue Benefitting Resident Contractors

    The Clock is Ticking: Construction Delays and Liquidated Damages

    New Case Alert: California Federal Court Allows Policy Stacking to Cover Continuous Injury

    Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 Not Just for Individual Homeowners Anymore?

    New Jersey Strengthens the Structural Integrity of Its Residential Builds

    Buildings Don't Have To Be Bird-Killers

    Transplants Send Nashville Home Market Upwards
    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

    Suing a Local Government in Land Use Cases – Part 2 – Procedural Due Process

    February 16, 2017 —
    n my last post I discussed suing a local government for a substantive due process violation. In this post, I discuss a the right to procedural due process. The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects prohibits the government from depriving an individual or business of life (in the case of an individual), liberty, or property without due process of law. Unlike the somewhat abstract and subjective concept of substantive due process, procedural due process is direct and objective. Generally, if an individual or business maintains a property or liberty interest, a local government must afford that individual or business notice that the government intends to deprive them of a liberty or property interest and a reasonable opportunity to be heard to contest the proposed deprivation. Unless there is an emergency, the notice and opportunity to be heard must be given before the government deprives an individual or business of a liberty of property interest. This is known as a pre-deprivation hearing. Because of the clear contours of the right, procedural due process violations are typically easier to prove than substantive due process violations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Wally Zimolong, Zimolong LLC
    Mr. Zimolong may be contacted at wally@zimolonglaw.com

    Lease-Leaseback Battle Continues as First District Court of Appeals Sides with Contractor and School District

    August 17, 2017 —
    Earlier, we wrote about Davis v. Fresno United School District (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 261, a Fifth District California Court of Appeals decision that sent shock waves through the school construction industry and raised questions regarding the use of California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery (Education Code sections 17400 et seq.). California’s lease-leaseback method of project delivery provides an alternative project delivery method for public school districts than the usual design-bid-build method of project delivery. Under the lease-leaseback method of project delivery, a school district leases its property to a developer, who in turn builds a school facility on the property and leases it back to the school district. One of the benefits of the lease-leaseback method of project delivery is that school districts do not need to come up with construction funds to build school facilities since they pay for the construction over time through their lease payments to the developer. Critics, however, argue that because lease-leaseback projects do not need to be competitively bid, they are ripe for cronyism between developers and school districts. In Davis, a taxpayer successfully brought suit against the Fresno Unified School District challenging the propriety of a lease-leaseback project because the entirety of the District’s “lease payments” occurred while the project was being constructed and thus, successfully argued the taxpayer, there was no “true” lease of a facility since it was under construction. 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

    Timber Prices Likely to Keep Rising

    October 30, 2013 —
    Lumber prices are expected to keep rising, and according to Terry Shumacher, who does business acquisition for private equity firms, that’s a sign to invest in lumber stocks. Writing at Seeking Alpha, he looks at one such company, Tembec, the eleventh largest lumber producer in North America. Tembec is headquartered in Canada, but its stock trades on both the Canadian and American markets. Mr. Schumacher points out that one of the advantages of Tembec as an investment is that its stock is currently trading at about $2.59 a share, so a $50 per million board feet increase in the cost of lumber would make a large percentage change to its earnings to price ratio. (As comparison, Mr. Schumacher offers West Fraser, which is trading at about $89.59. There, the increase in lumber prices would have a much smaller effect on the stock price.) There’s going to be a greater demand for lumber, not only due to increased housing starts but that North American firms have started exporting lumber to China. Add to that the loss of trees in some areas due to beetle infestations. The death of standing timber has lead to some sawmills shutting down for lack of logs. All of which points to increased timber prices. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    July 03, 2022 —
    Summary: In Washington, contractors must be properly registered in order to pursue a legal action against a customer for breach of contract. Dobson v. Archibald, a February 2022 decision by the Washington Court of Appeals, reinforced how the governing statute – RCW 18.27.080 – does not simply create an affirmative defense but establishes a mandatory pleading prerequisite.1 Discussion: In 2018, Archibald hired Dobson to refinish his hardwood floors for $3,200. Dobson was not a registered contractor. She had been referred to Archibald by acquaintances who were familiar with her construction and home repair work, including improvements Dobson had made to her own home. Archibald paid Dobson a $700 deposit before Dobson began her work. At the completion of the floor repair project, Archibald was unhappy with the appearance of the floors and informed Dobson that he would not pay the remaining $2,500. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John Leary, Gordon & Rees
    Mr. Leary may be contacted at jleary@grsm.com

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    May 18, 2020 —
    In Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America v. KLA-Tencor Corp. (No. H044890; filed 1/16/20, ord. pub. 2/13/20), a California appeals court ruled that commercial general liability insurance for personal and advertising injury, defined to include malicious prosecution, does not cover a Walker Process antitrust cause of action under the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act for using a fraudulently procured patent to attempt to monopolize the market. Travelers insured KLA under commercial liability policies with coverage for personal and advertising injury liability, which was defined as “injury, other than ‘advertising injury’, caused by. . . (2) Malicious prosecution.” Reprinted courtesy of Christopher Kendrick, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Valerie A. Moore, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Kendrick may be contacted at ckendrick@hbblaw.com Ms. Moore may be contacted at vmoore@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    California Enacts New Claims Resolution Process for Public Works Projects

    January 19, 2017 —
    If you’re a public entity or contractor involved in public works construction you should be aware of a new law, AB 626, which took effect on the first of this year and establishes a new mandatory claims resolution process for disputes on public works projects. Here’s what you need to know: What is the new law and where is it codified at? AB 626 added new Public Contract Code Section 9204 that according to the bill’s author, Assemblymember David Chiu of San Francisco, establishes “a claim resolution process applicable to any claim by a contractor in connection with a public works project.” 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

    Design-Build Contracting: Is the Shine Off the Apple?

    March 09, 2020 —
    The design-build delivery method offers many benefits to owners. Among the cited benefits are that projects are generally completed faster, at a lower cost, by allowing innovative approaches through early and continual contractor involvement in the design process. The design contractor serves as a single point of contact responsible for both the design and construction of the project. The Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) utilized the design-build procurement method on the largest project ($2 billion) of its type in the state of Washington: the Highway 99 Tunnel, which was finished almost three years late after the tunnel-boring machine (“Bertha”) broke down six years ago. The sorted tale of the SR-99 Tunnel Project was the source of many of this firm’s blog articles.[1] The State of Washington staunchly maintained that the design-build contract protected its taxpayers from covering the repair costs to the tunnel-boring machine when it broke down in 2013. Bertha did not resume tunneling for almost two years, putting on hold removal of the Alaska Way viaduct and rebuilding of the Seattle Waterfront without an elevated highway. In December 2013, the contractor for the project, Seattle Tunnel Partners (“STP”), contended that a 110-foot long 8” steel pipe which Bertha hit caused the breakdown. That pipe had been installed for groundwater testing by WSDOT in 2002 during its preliminary engineering for the viaduct replacement project. The project’s Dispute Review Board (“DRB”) composed of three tunneling experts found that the pipe constituted a “differing site condition” for which the State was responsible to disclose to contractors. The Board, whose views were non-binding, did not opine about how much damage the undisclosed pipe cost.[2] In other words, the mere fact that a differing site condition occurred did not establish that there was a causal connection between the damages which STP was seeking (in excess of $600 million) and the differing site condition (the 8” steel pipe which WSDOT lawyers at trial derisively referred to as “nothing more than a toothpick for Bertha’s massive cutter head”). STP maintained that Bertha had made steady progress except for three days immediately after hitting the pipe. It didn’t help the contractors’ case that during the discovery phase of the two-month trial, WSDOT lawyers uncovered documents showing that the contractor’s tunnel workers encountered and logged the pipe before digging began.[3] Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at john.ahlers@acslawyers.com

    Mortgagors Seek Coverage Under Mortgagee's Policy

    July 19, 2021 —
    The mortgagor homeowners survived a motion to dismiss their claim for coverageunder the lender's property policy after their home suffered hurricane damage. Gary v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100010 (W.D. La. May 26, 2021). Plaintiffs' home was mortgaged by Pennymac Loan Services, LLC. Pennymac held a property policy with American Security to insure its interest in the home. Plaintiffs were not named as insureds or additional insureds under the policy. Plaintiffs were identified as the borrowers under the policy on the Declarations page. After hurricane damage to their home, plaintiffs sued American Security for coverage for the losses. American Security moved to dismiss, arguing plaintiffs were neither additional insureds nor third party beneficiaries. Lender-placed policies were designed to insure the lender's collateral whenever the borrower failed to maintain adequate insurance. The Loss Payment provisions in the policy stated that "Loss will be made payable to the named insured [Pennymac]. No coverage will be available to any mortgagee other than that shown as the named insured on the Declarations." 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