BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington hospital construction expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing and waterproofing expert witnessSeattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code 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


    Lenders and Post-Foreclosure Purchasers Have Standing to Make Construction Defect Claims for After-Discovered Conditions

    Insurer Fails to Establish Prejudice Due to Late Notice

    Expert Excluded After Never Viewing Damaged Property

    Business Risk Exclusions Dismissed in Summary Judgment Motion

    Bats, Water, Soil, and Bridges- an Engineer’s dream

    Pass-Through Subcontractor Claims, Liquidating Agreements, and Avoiding a Two-Front War

    Surprising Dismissal of False Claims Act Case Based on Appointments Clause - What Does It Mean?

    Don’t Believe Everything You Hear: Liability of Asbestos Pipe Manufacturer Upheld Despite Exculpatory Testimony of Plaintiff

    Affordable Housing, Military Contracts and Mars: 3D Printing Construction Potential Builds

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    All Aboard! COVID-19 Securities Suit Sets Sail, Implicates D&O Insurance

    Justice Didn’t Ensure Mortgage Fraud Was Priority, IG Says

    Spencer Mayer Receives Miami-Dade Bar Association's '40 Under 40' Award

    Elon Musk’s Proposed Vegas Strip Transit System Advanced by City Council Vote

    Designer of World’s Tallest Building Wants to Turn Skyscrapers Into Batteries

    New Survey Reveals Present-Day Risks of Asbestos Exposure in America - 38% in High-Risk Jobs, 47% Vulnerable through Second-Hand Exposure

    Kansas Man Caught for Construction Scam in Virginia

    Insurer’s Duty to Defend: When is it Triggered? When is it Not?

    CDC Issues Moratorium on Residential Evictions Through 2020

    Ex-San Francisco DPW Director Sentenced to Seven Years in Corruption Case

    Climate-Proofing Your Home: Upgrades to Weather a Drought

    Construction Defect Claim Must Be Defended Under Florida Law

    Be Careful When Requiring Fitness for Duty Examinations

    CCPA Class Action Lawsuits Are Coming. Are You Ready?

    Breach of an Oral Contract and Unjust Enrichment and Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

    Sochi Construction Unlikely to be Completed by End of Olympic Games

    Judge Gives Cintra Bid Protest of $9B Md. P3 Project Award New Life

    Issues of Fact Prevent Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    Insurer Able to Refuse Coverage for Failed Retaining Wall

    Forget Backyard Pools, Build a Swimming Pond Instead

    Ohio Rejects the Majority Trend and Finds No Liability Coverage for a Subcontractor’s Faulty Work

    Meritage Acquires Legendary Communities

    Fifth Circuit -- Damage to Property Beyond Insured’s Product/Work Not Precluded By ‘Your Product/Your Work Exclusion’

    Proposed Florida Construction Defect Act

    New Hampshire’s Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property Does Not Apply to Product Manufacturers

    California Court of Appeal Vacates $30M Non-Economic Damages Award Due to Failure to Properly Apportion Liability and Attorney Misconduct During Closing Argument

    No Duty to Defend Construction Defect Claims under Kentucky Law

    Lightstone Committing $2 Billion to Hotel Projects

    New Addition To New Jersey Court Rules Impacts More Than Trial Practice

    U.S. Stocks Fluctuate Near Record After Housing Data

    Collapse Claim Fails Due To Defectively Designed Roof and Deck

    Brad Pitt’s Foundation Sues New Orleans Architect for Construction Defects

    Washington Supreme Court Expands Contractor Notice Obligations

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    Foundation Arbitration Doesn’t Preclude Suing Over Cracks

    Report Highlights Trends in Construction Tech, Digitization, and AI

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

    Amada Family Limited Partnership v. Pomeroy: Colorado Court of Appeals Expressly Affirms the Continuing Viability of the Common-Law After-Acquired Title Doctrine and Expressly Recognizes Utility Easements by Necessity

    Virginia General Assembly Tweaks Pay-if-Paid Ban

    Denial of Coverage For Bodily Injury After Policy Period Does Not Violate Public Policy
    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

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    January 04, 2021 —
    Damage to a building caused by the break of a water pipe was not a collapse under the policy. Naabani Twin Stars v. Travelers Cos., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196443 (D. N. M. Oct. 22, 2020). An underground water line ruptured on plaintiffs property This caused a collapse under the adjacent parking lot, which in turn caused land beneath the building go change positions and damage the building. A geotechnical consultant concluded that a material change in the site conditions occurred as a direct result of the rupture of the water pipe in the parking lot, and that those changes directly affected the settlement of the building. Travelers denied coverage for the damage. Travelers concluded that the building settlement was the result of subsurface movement, which invoked the earth movement exclusion. Travelers inspection concluded that the building was not in a state of collapse. The policy defined collapse as "an abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or structure, or any part of a building or structure, with the result that the building, or part of the building, cannot be occupied for its intended purpose." 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

    Texas Court of Appeals Conditionally Grant Petition for Writ of Mandamus to Anderson

    April 25, 2011 —

    The Texas Court of Appeals conditionally grant mandamus relief to Anderson Construction Company and Ronnie Anderson (collectively “Anderson”)… from the trial court in a construction defect lawsuit filed by Brent L. Mainwaring and Tatayana Mainwaring. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.001-.007 (West 2000 & Supp. 2010). Relators contend the trial court abused its discretion by compelling discovery while the case was abated by operation of law.

    The Court of Appeals opinion describes what led up to the proceedings: “The Mainwarings’ original petition identified certain defects in their Anderson-constructed home. Those defects concerned the roof trusses and framing, air conditioning, mortar and masonry, exterior doors and windows, and weep holes. With respect to the five areas of defects identified in their original petition, the Mainwarings gave Anderson the statutorily required notice on January 13, 2010. After implementing agreed extensions, Anderson made an offer of settlement for the defects the Mainwarings identified in their notice. Almost eight months later, the Mainwarings filed an amended petition adding defects they had not included in their original petition and notice. The additional defects the Mainwarings included in their amended petition had not been addressed by Anderson’s offer of settlement.”

    Following these events, Anderson claimed the Mainwarings did not respond in writing to their settlement offer. “Anderson filed a verified plea in abatement on December 2, 2010. In the trial court, Anderson claimed that the Mainwarings failed to respond in writing to Anderson’s settlement offer, as required by Section 27.004(b) of the RCLA. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(b)(1). The Mainwarings moved to compel discovery responses from Anderson. The Mainwarings alleged that they rejected Anderson’s settlement offer, and that if their response was insufficient, they contend that Anderson’s offer was rejected by operation of law on the twenty-fifth day after the Mainwarings received it. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(i). The Mainwarings’ motion to compel was not supported by affidavit. See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. 27.004(d)(2). On January 13, 2011, Anderson filed a verified supplemental plea in abatement. Anderson alleged that the Mainwarings failed to provide written notice concerning the newly alleged defects and complained the Mainwarings were attempting to circumvent the inspection and resolution procedure of the RCLA. Over Anderson’s objection that the lawsuit had been abated, the trial court granted the Mainwarings’ motion to compel discovery.”

    After listening to both sides, the Court of Appeals offered this reasoning for their opinion: “The parties do not dispute that Anderson inspected the property before the Mainwarings alleged the existence of additional defects in their amended pleading, nor do the Mainwarings claim that Anderson has been given an opportunity to inspect the additional defects the Mainwarings identified in their amended pleadings. We conclude the trial court did not have the discretion to deny or lift the abatement until the Mainwarings established their compliance with the statute. In other words, the Mainwarings are required to provide Anderson a reasonable opportunity to inspect the additional defects identified by their amended pleading, which will allow Anderson the opportunity to cure or settle with respect to the newly identified defects.”

    The Court of Appeals spoke directly on the issue of mandamus relief: “The Mainwarings contend that mandamus relief is not available because the trial court’s ruling does not prevent Anderson from making settlement offers during the discovery process. ‘An appellate remedy is “adequate” when any benefits to mandamus review are outweighed by the detriments.’ In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 136 (Tex. 2004). The failure to abate a case is typically not subject to mandamus. See In re Allstate Cnty. Mut. Ins. Co., 85 S.W.3d 193, 196 (Tex. 2002) (citing Abor v. Black, 695 S.W.2d 564, 567 (Tex. 1985)). In this case, however, the case was abated by operation of law. By ignoring the statutory abatement, the trial court interfered with the statutory procedure for developing and resolving construction defect claims. See In re Kimball Hill Homes Tex., Inc., 969 S.W.2d 522, 525 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, orig. proceeding) (An appeal provides an inadequate remedy for the trial court’s failure to observe automatic abatement pursuant to the RCLA.). The benefits of mandamus review are not outweighed by the detriments of mandamus review in this case.“

    In conclusion, “The trial court had no discretion to compel discovery while the case was abated, and Anderson, who has been compelled to respond to discovery during a period the case was under an automatic abatement, has no adequate remedy on appeal. Accordingly, we conditionally grant the petition for writ of mandamus. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to vacate its order of February 3, 2011, and fails to refrain from proceeding with the case until a motion to reinstate is filed that establishes compliance with the notice and inspection requirements of the Residential Construction Liability Act.”

    Read the trial court’s decision…

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

    Insurer Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Construction Defect Claims

    February 10, 2012 —

    The insurer unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, contending it had no obligation to defend two related underlying construction defect cases. Amerisure Ins. Co. v. R.L.Lantana Boatyard, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2466 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2012).

    An engineering report noted design construction defects and deficiencies in visible, physical improvements at The Moorings at Lantana Condominium. In two lawsuits, The Moorings sued the developer, R.L. Lantana Boatyard ("RLLB"), and the contractor, Current Builders of Florida.

    Current Builders was insured by Amerisure. RLLB was named as an additional insured under the Amerisure policy.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

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

    Loss Caused by Subcontractor's Faulty Work Covered in Georgia

    January 17, 2013 —

    The Georgia Court of Appeals found a subcontractor was covered under a CGL policy for loss caused by alleged faulty workmanship. Maxum Indem. Co. v. Jimenez, 2012 Ga. App. LEXIS 970 (Ga. Ct. App. Nov. 20, 2012).

     

    Jimenez was hired as a subcontractor to install pipes for a dormitory construction project at Georgia Southern University. Subsequent to the construction, a pipe burst occurred at the dormitory, causing damage to several units. After a jury trial, Jimenez was found liable for $191,382 in damages that arose from his negligent pipe work. 

     

    Jimenez was insured under a CGL policy issued by Maxum. Maxum filed a suit for a declaratory judgment, seeking a declaration that the claim against Jimenez was not covered.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Massachusetts High Court to Decide if Insurers Can Recoup Defense Costs

    February 07, 2018 —
    The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is set to hear argument on February 6 in a case that will decide whether insurers can recoup defense costs if it is later determined that they owed no duty to defend an underlying claim. At issue in Holyoke Mut. Ins. Co. v. Vibram USA, Inc., No SJC-12401, is Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Craig O'Neill, White and Williams, LLP
    Mr. O'Neill may be contacted at oneillc@whiteandwilliams.com

    “For What It’s Worth”

    October 21, 2024 —
    The legal doctrine of quantum meruit is essentially referring to recovering “for what it’s worth,” incorporating the Latin phrase for “as much as one has deserved.” Quantum meruit recovery occurs when there is no contract between parties for the particular item for which recovery is sought. Hence, quantum meruit recovery is generally a means of last resort to endeavor to make oneself whole. So, it was for a subcontractor seeking nearly $14,000,000 for work it performed on a construction project in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The subcontractor sued on contract as well as quantum meruit/unjust enrichment. The court initially dismissed the quantum meruit/unjust enrichment claims – because there was a contract claim – whereupon the contract claim was dismissed on summary judgment: the subcontractor failed to timely submit change proposals and, consequently, “lost contract remedies available to recover amounts it sought in the change proposals.” 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

    County Officials Refute Resident’s Statement that Defect Repairs Improper

    August 27, 2014 —
    Manatee County, Florida officials stated that “they are confident construction defects at the Willowbrook subdivision being fixed by the builder KB Home are being properly supervised and repaired,” according to the Bradenton Herald. However, a resident told the Bradenton Herald previously that “mold remediation isn’t being done properly and good wood was being installed over rotted wood.” John Barnott, director of the Manatee County Building & Development Services Department told the Bradenton Herald that the county building chief has been at the site “every week, three or four times a week.” Carroll Dupre, the county building chief, stated that the development “looks real good.” The commissioner, Vanessa Baugh, stated that she had not received any complaints from Willowbrook residents and that “she was ‘not pleased with the implications of the article.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/05/22) – Hurricane Ian, the Inflation Reduction Act, and European Real Estate

    October 24, 2022 —
    This week’s round-up features Hurricane Ian’s effect on the construction labor pool, the Inflation Reduction Act’s projected impact on the real estate and construction industry, Europe’s real estate market, and more.
    • The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), designed to reduce the nation’s carbon footprint by jump-starting innovation and adoption of cleaner energy sources, also contains large segments aimed at real estate and construction. (Chava Gourarie, Commercial Observer)
    • Damage caused by Hurricane Ian’s massive storm surge, flooding and winds is projected to hike demand for experienced construction workers. (Zachary Phillips, Construction Dive)
    • According to the National Multifamily Housing Council’s monthly construction survey released Sept. 29, 2022, almost all developers are experiencing construction delays. (Paul Bergeron, Globest)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team