BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    industrial building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington stucco expert witnessSeattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington hospital construction expert witnessSeattle Washington architectural engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert testimony
    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


    Legal Battle Kicks Off to Minimize Baltimore Bridge Liabilities

    Massachusetts Court Holds Statute of Repose Bars Certain Asbestos-Related Construction Claims

    The Risks and Rewards of Sustainable Building Design

    Washington State Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision on Spearin Doctrine

    That’s What I have Insurance For, Right?

    Wait! Don’t Sign Yet: Reviewing Contract Protections During the COVID Pandemic

    PSA: Pay If Paid Ban Goes into Effect on January 1, 2023

    Report Highlights Trends in Construction Tech, Digitization, and AI

    After Restoring Power in North Carolina, Contractor Faces Many Claims

    Utah Becomes First State to Enact the Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act

    New Jersey Court Adopts Continuous Trigger for Construction Defect Claims

    Private Project Payment Bonds and Pay if Paid in Virginia

    Delay In Noticing Insurer of Loss is Not Prejudicial

    COVID-19 Damages and Time Recovery: Contract Checklist and Analysis

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions, Four Attorneys Promoted to Partner and One Attorney Promoted to Counsel

    A New Lawsuit Might Change the Real Estate Industry Forever

    Construction Company Head Pleads Guilty to Insurance and Tax Fraud

    Be Careful How You Terminate: Terminating for Convenience May Limit Your Future Rights

    Definitions Matter in Illinois: Tenant Held Liable Only for Damage to Apartment Unit

    Connecticut Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C" Grade

    Building and Landscape Standards Enacted in Response to the Governor's Mandatory Water Restrictions Dealing with the Drought and Possible Effects of El Niño

    Colorado Senate Revives Construction Defects Reform Bill

    Traub Lieberman Partner Eric D. Suben and Associate Laura Puhala Win Summary Judgment in Favor of Insurer, Determining it has No Duty to Defend

    Beth Cook Expands Insurance Litigation Team at Payne & Fears

    Tighter Requirements and a New Penalty for Owners of Vacant or Abandoned Storefronts in San Francisco

    California Supreme Court McMillin Ruling

    Hawaii Federal District Court Again Rejects Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

    Insurance Client Alert: Denial of Summary Judgment Does Not Automatically Establish Duty to Defend

    Dust Infiltration Due to Construction Defect Excluded from Policy

    Terminating Notice of Commencement Without Contractor’s Final Payment Affidavit

    AI Systems and the Real Estate Industry

    LAX Construction Defect Suit May Run into Statute of Limitations

    What To Do When the Government is Slow to Decide a Claim?

    North Carolina Court Rules In Favor Of All Sums

    No Additional Insured Coverage for Subcontractor's Work Outside Policy Period

    Civil Engineers: Montana's Infrastructure Grade Declines to a 'C-'

    Colorado Court of Appeals holds that insurance companies owe duty of prompt and effective communication to claimants and repair subcontractors

    Consider Manner In Which Loan Agreement (Promissory Note) Is Drafted

    California Court of Appeal Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of anti-SLAPP Motion in Dispute Over Construction of Church Facilities

    Partner John Toohey and Senior Associate Sammy Daboussi Obtain a Complete Defense Verdict for Their Contractor Client!

    Mondaq’s 2023 Construction Comparative Guide

    Florida’s “Groundbreaking” Property Insurance Reform Law

    Ahead of the Storm: Preparing for Irma

    Be Careful When Walking Off of a Construction Project

    Connecticut Supreme Court Again Asked to Determine the Meaning of Collapse

    DoD Testing New Roofing System that Saves Energy and Water

    First Circuit: No Coverage, No Duty to Investigate Alleged Loss Prior to Policy Period

    Forget Palm Springs—Santa Fe Is the New Mecca for Modern Architecture

    "My Bad, I Thought It Was in Good Faith" is Not Good Enough - Contractor Ordered to Pay Prompt Payment Penalties

    History and Gentrification Clash in a Gilded Age Resort
    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

    Quick Note: COVID-19 Claim – Proving Causation

    August 03, 2020 —
    In certain jurisdictions, the number of people testing positive for COVID-19 is on the rise. As this occurs, there is the possibility that a construction project will have to deal with one or more workers testing positive. That is the current reality. If the dialogue has not occurred before, now is the time to discuss any enhanced measures—above OSHA guidelines—that could be implemented to address this reality and mitigate the risk. Part of the reality, though, is that regardless of the enhanced measures and mitigation, it is impossible to truly prevent this risk. No one disputes COVID-19. There may be a dispute as to whether COVID-19 constitutes a force majeure event or some other event, however, before you start labeling it, you still NEED TO PROVE the impact caused by COVID-19. There needs to be a cause-and-effect relationship so you can address (i) how this impacted the critical path of your schedule and/or (ii) how this impacted labor productivity. In other words, you need to prove causation. Stating there was a delay or loss of productivity without establishing the cause-and-effect relationship (i.e, causation) provides no value because it does not support the production impact or time extension and, without either, there is no basis for additional compensation (even if you establish it should be deemed an excusable, compensable delay). 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

    Loaded Boom of Burning Tower Crane Collapses in Manhattan, Injuring Six

    August 07, 2023 —
    The boom of a tower crane, with its engine on fire, collapsed July 26 at a high-rise construction site in midtown Manhattan—hitting the face of the building across the street as it dropped its 16-ton load. City officials said they would investigate the mishap, which caused minor injuries to two firefighters and four others. Reprinted courtesy of James Leggate, Engineering News-Record Mr. Leggate may be contacted at leggatej@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Consolidated Case With Covered and Uncovered Allegations Triggers Duty to Defend

    May 20, 2015 —
    The Illinois Court of Appeals held that the insurer had a duty to defend a consolidated case that included one complaint alleging intentional acts and another complaint alleging negligence. Farmers Auto. Ins. Ass'n v. Neumann, 2015 Il. App. 140026 (Ill. Ct. App. March 24, 2015, reh'g denied March 24, 2015). Neumann allegedly hit Bitner with his automobile as Bitner, a police offier, was directing traffic. Bitner sued Neumann, alleging intentional assault and intentional battery. Farmers rejected Neumann's tender because the policy did not cover intentional acts. Farmers filed for a declaratory judgment. In his answer, Neumann included an affidavit stating that he did not intend to strike or cause bodily harm to Bitner. The trial court granted the motion to strike the affidavit. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Lasso Needed to Complete Vegas Hotel Implosion

    February 18, 2015 —
    The Miami Herald reported that “demolition workers used an Old West method on Tuesday to finish an incomplete casino implosion in Las Vegas.” The Clarion Hotel and Casino owner Lorenzo Doumani told the Miami Herald that “[t]hey lassoed the building with steel cables, got a crane, and pulled and pulled and pulled.” Burke Construction used a 2-ton explosive punch to bring the structure down, however, the concrete building dropped four stories but remained upright. Burke Construction’s corporate safety coordinator, Anthony Schlect, told the Miami Herald that he was investigating the incident. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Nine Gibbs Giden Partners Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers 2022

    February 14, 2022 —
    Premiere law firm Gibbs Giden Locher Turner Senet & Wittbrodt, LLP announced that 9 of the firm's partners have been selected by their peers for inclusion in the 2022 Southern California Super Lawyers list. The Super Lawyers lists are issued by Thomson Reuters. These lists honor no more than 5% of licensed attorneys in each state, based on peer recognition and professional achievements. The following Gibbs Giden attorneys have been selected to the 2022 Southern California Super Lawyers list: LOS ANGELES Barbara Gadbois – Construction Law Sara Kornblatt – Construction Law and Litigation William (Bill) Locher - Real Estate and Business Law Ted Senet – Insurance and Construction Law Glenn Turner – Construction Law and Litigation Richard Wittbrodt – Construction Law and Litigation, AAA Mediator/Arbitrator IRVINE Philip Zvonicek – Business, Corporate, Construction, Insurance Law WESTLAKE Jason Adams – Construction and Insurance Law Christopher Ng – (Managing Partner) Construction and Business Law Gibbs Giden understands the complex challenges companies face in today’s competitive business environment. From our roots in construction law to our evolution into a premier law firm serving the diverse needs of the business community, we provide the insight and advice our clients need to position themselves for the future. www.gibbsgiden.com LOS ANGELES | IRVINE | SAN JOSE | WESTLAKE | LAS VEGAS Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Shifting Sands of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    February 03, 2020 —
    In California there are few tools which work to protect the employer, and California employers may have just lost another one. On October 10, 2019, Governor Gavin Newson signed into law AB 51, which bans the use of mandatory arbitration agreements in employment contracts. More specifically, AB 51 adds Section 432.6 to the California Labor Code, making it unlawful to require a prospective employee, or current employee, to waive any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of any provision of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”)(Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) or the California Labor Code, starting January 1, 2020. Additionally, an employer is also prohibited from threatening, retaliating or discriminating against, or terminating any applicant or employee who may choose not to sign a voluntary arbitration agreement. Previously, an employer was able to require employees and prospective employees to agree to arbitration to resolve almost any and all disputes between the employee and the employer as a term of their employment. These terms were often the bulk of employers’ written contracts. Employers could have employees waive the right to a jury trial, the right to court costs, and other expenses, provided that the employer paid for the expenses of the alternative dispute resolution. The injured employees right to recover attorney’s fees was always a non-waivable right under the Labor Code. There were only a few actions which could not be arbitrated, the most prominent exception being the right to seek recovery under the Private Attorney’s General Action (PAGA). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tim Scully, Porter Law Group
    Mr. Scully may be contacted at tscully@porterlaw.com

    Quick Note: Insurer Must Comply with Florida’s Claims Administration Act

    September 14, 2017 —
    As an insured, know YOUR rights under Florida’s Claims Administration Act (Florida Statute s. 627.426). I wrote an article on this exact topic. If a third-party claim is asserted, or in the process of being asserted, against you, do yourself a favor and consult a lawyer that can assist you with preserving your insurance coverage rights. You pay liability insurance premiums for a reason so make sure you are not doing anything that could jeopardize rights under applicable insurance policies. A liability insurer must comply with the Claims Administration Act if it wants to deny coverage based on a coverage defense (e.g., the insured’s failure to cooperate with the insurer). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at Dadelstein@gmail.com

    Damages in First Trial Establishing Liability of Tortfeasor Binding in Bad Faith Trial Against Insurer

    October 22, 2014 —
    The court considered whether, in a second trial for bad faith, the insured was required to again prove her damages, instead of relying on the jury's damage determination in the first trial where the tortfeasor's liability was established. Geico Gen. Ins. Co. v. Paton, 2014 Fla. Ct. App. LEXIS 14362 (Fla. Ct. App. Sept. 17, 2014). The insured was injured in a car accident caused by the negligence of the underinsured driver. Geico paid the insured the $10,000 policy limit under her policy. The insured's mother also had uninsured/underinsured coverage with Geico, with policy limits of $100,000. When the insured demanded the $100,000 policy limits from her mother's policy, Geico offered $1,000. Later, Geico offered $5,000, but returned to the $1,000 offer after the insured refused to settle. When the insured reduced her demand to $22,500, Geico did not respond. The insured sued and the case went to trial. The jury awarded $10,000 for past pain and suffering, and $350,000 for future pain and suffering. The verdict set the insured's total damages at $469,247. Geico did not file a motion for new trial nor did it appeal. Judgment was entered in favor of the insured, but was limited to the $100,000 UM policy limits. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com