BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    office building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington construction cost estimating expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington building envelope expert witnessSeattle Washington contractor 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


    Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

    Surviving the Construction Law Backlog: Nontraditional Approaches to Resolution

    Homeowners Should Beware, Warn Home Builders

    City of Aspen v. Burlingame Ranch II Condominium Owners Association: Clarifying the Application of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act

    U.S. Supreme Court Halts Enforcement of the OSHA Vaccine or Test Mandate

    Cumulative Impact Claims and Definition by Certain Boards

    Insurance Litigation Roundup: “Post No Bills!”

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    Differing Site Conditions: What to Expect from the Court When You Encounter the Unexpected

    California Ballot Initiative Seeks to Repeal Infrastructure Funding Bill

    Spearin Doctrine: Alive, Well and Thriving on its 100th Birthday

    Your “Independent Contractor” Clause Just Got a Little Less Relevant

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    Revisiting OSHA’s Controlling Employer Policy

    Reasonableness of Liquidated Damages Determined at Time of Contract (or, You Can’t Look Back Again)

    Disputed Facts on Cause of Collapse Results in Denied Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment

    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss "Redundant Claims" Denied

    Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Limits The Scope Of A Builder’s Implied Warranty Of Habitability

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    CDJ’s #10 Topic of the Year: Transport Insurance Company v. Superior Court (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 1216.

    Construction Jobs Keep Rising, with April Gain of 33,000

    The Impact of Sopris Lodging v. Schofield Excavation on Timeliness of Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    Housing in U.S. Cools as Rate Rise Hits Sales: Mortgages

    Florida Governor Signs Construction Defect Amendments into Law

    Wall Street’s Palm Beach Foray Fuels Developer Office Rush

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Attorney Fee Award Under the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act

    Cameron Pledges to Double Starter Homes to Boost Supply

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Court Requires Adherence to “Good Faith and Fair Dealing” in Construction Defect Coverage

    Anti-Fracking Win in N.Y. Court May Deal Blow to Industry

    GSA Releases Updated Standards to Accelerate Federal Buildings Toward Zero Emissions

    Court Adopts Magistrate's Recommendation to Deny Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion in Collapse Case

    After 60 Years, I-95 Is Complete

    Electronic Signatures On Contracts: Are They Truly Compliant?

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Featured In Northern California Super Lawyers 2021!

    Court Rules that Collapse Coverage for Damage Caused “Only By” Specified Perils Violates Efficient Proximate Cause Rule and is Unenforceable

    Gene Witkin Celebrates First Anniversary as Member of Ross Hart’s Mediation Team

    Insurer in Bad Faith Due to Adjuster's Failure to Keep Abreast of Case Law

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Retroactive Application of a Construction Subcontract Containing a Merger Clause? Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal Answers in the Affirmative

    Eleventh Circuit’s Noteworthy Discussion on Bad Faith Insurance Claims

    Another Colorado Construction Defect Reform Bill Dies

    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Balancing Cybersecurity Threats in Smart Cities: Is the Potential Convenience of “Smart” Intersections Worth the Risk?

    Texas EIFS Case May Have Future Implications for Construction Defects

    Law Firm Settles Two Construction Defect Suits for a Combined $4.7 Million

    ASCE Statement on Biden Administration Permitting Action Plan

    Impaired Property Exclusion Bars Coverage When Loose Bolt Interferes with MRI Unit Operation

    The Nightmare Scenario for Florida’s Coastal Homeowners

    Emerging Trends in Shortened Statutes of Limitations and Statutes of Repose
    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

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (02/15/23) – Proptech Solutions, Supply Chain Pivots, and the Inflation Reduction Act

    March 06, 2023 —
    This week’s round-up explores how proptech could alleviate the financial burden of property owners’ vacant office space, manufacturing firms are bolstering the industrial real estate sector, a 200-MW Texas project is first to leverage IRA tax credit for stand-alone energy storage, and more.
    • Proptech could serve as an economic regenerator to the rise in empty office space that has recently become a major financial liability for businesses. (Joe Dyton, Connected Real Estate Magazine)
    • The global business process outsourcing (BPO) industry and accompanying real estate infrastructure that supports it should be aware of the potential impact of AI chatbots becoming capable of optimizing customer service with minimal human input. (Zain Jaffer, Forbes)
    • Industrial real estate is being bolstered by manufacturing firms increasingly returning their operations to the U.S., which was already one of the hottest commercial property sectors in the last decade. (JLL)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Loss Ensuing from Faulty Workmanship Covered

    April 28, 2014 —
    The court found coverage for damage resulting from faulty workmanship. Drury Co. v. Mo. United Sch. Ins. Counsel, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 319 (Mo. Ct. App. March 25, 2014). The School District entered a contract with general contractor, Penzel Construction Company, Inc., to build an addition to a high school. Under the prime contract, the School District was to purchase property insurance, including builder's risk "all-risk" coverage. The policy was to cover the interests of the owner, the contractor, subcontractors and sub-subcontractors in the project. The School District obtained a policy from Missouri United School Insurance Counsel (MUSIC). Exclusions in the all-risk policy included loss due to faulty workmanship or materials, "unless loss by a peril not otherwise excluded ensues and then MUSIC shall be liable only for such ensuing loss." 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

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    August 01, 2023 —
    The trial court erred in placing the burden on the policyholder to establish depreciation in determining the actual cash value of the loss. SFR Serv., LLC v. Tower Hill Prime Ins. Co., 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 3570 (Fla. Ct. App. May 26, 2023). The insureds' roof was damaged by Hurricane Irma. They submitted their claim to their insurer, Tower Hill. The cost of repair was assessed at $7,726.94, below the amount of the deductible. Therefore, there was no recovery under the policy. The insureds assigned their claim to SFR Services, LLC, their roofing contractor. SFR submitted a claim to Tower Hill for $162,083.84. Tower Hill refused to pay and SFR sued. 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

    New Jersey Supreme Court Rules that Subcontractor Work with Resultant Damage is both an “Occurrence” and “Property Damage” under a Standard Form CGL Policy

    September 01, 2016 —
    According to a client alert by the firm Peckar & Abramson, P.C. (P&A), “In a recent significant decision, the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that defective work of a subcontractor that causes consequential property damage is both an ‘occurrence’ and ‘property damage’ under the terms of a standard form commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policy.” Patrick J. Greene, Jr., and Frank A. Hess of P&A wrote that the Cypress Point Condominium Assoc., Inc. v Adria Towers, LLC, 2016 N.J. Lexis 847 (Aug.4,2016) “decision is important in New Jersey and in other jurisdictions that had relied upon the influential New Jersey case, Weedo v. Stone–E–Brick, Inc., 81 N.J. 233 (1979), that had determined that such claims involved non-insured ‘business risks.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Rio Olympic Infrastructure Costs of $2.3 Billion Are Set to Rise

    January 31, 2014 —
    Brazilian authorities announced 5.6 billion reais ($2.3 billion) will be spent on infrastructure directly related to the 2016 Rio de Janeiro Olympic Games and those costs will rise as projects are added. Yesterday’s announcement comes months behind schedule, and after pressure on public bodies to reveal exactly how much it will cost for Rio to be the first South American city to host the quadrennial showpiece. Delays and cost overruns to several projects related to this year’s soccer World Cup have sharpened the focus on the Olympics. “We are committed to being on schedule,” Sports Minister Aldo Rebelo said at a press conference in Rio to announce the spending plans. “It is the first time we have a consortium of three levels of government. It is in an effort to ensure the success and execution of all the commitments to deliver the Olympics in Rio in 2016.” Mr. Panja may be contacted at tpanja@bloomberg.net and Mr. Biller may be contacted at dbiller1@bloomberg.net. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tariq Panja and David Biller, Bloomberg

    Coverage for Named Windstorm Removed by Insured, Terminating Such Coverage

    August 15, 2022 —
    Over a series of policies, the insured had no coverage for named windstorms when it was removed from the policies in return for a reduced premium. Shiloh Christian Ctr. v. Aspen Sec. Ins. Co. 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100959 (M. D. Fla. May 9, 2022). Plaintiff had coverage from Aspen from 2014 through at least 2018 under several year-long policies, each of which renewed the prior year's policy. The premium for the 2014-2015 Policy was $50,000. In May 2015, plaintiff asked what the premium would be without hurricane coverage. He was informed this would reduce the premium to $32,000. The insured asked for the change in coverage to eliminate named windstorm coverage and a return premium was issued to the insured for $16,545. The 2016-2017 policy was issued for a premium of $22,500. The policy indicated it was a renewal of the prior policy. The revised quote made clear that the policy would exclude coverage for "Named Windstorm." 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

    New California "Construction" Legislation

    November 08, 2018 —

    Governor Jerry Brown signed two potentially impactful Senate Bills relating to the construction of apartment buildings late last month. These Bills, discussed further below, were introduced, in part, in response to the Berkeley balcony collapse in June 2015, which was determined by the California Contractors State License Board to be caused by the failure of severely rotted structural support joists the repair of which were deferred by the property manager, despite indications of water damage.

    SENATE BILL 721 ESTABLISHES HEIGHTENED “LOAD-BEARING” INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS

    On August 21, 2018, the California State Senate passed SB 721, one of two bills by Senator Jerry Hill introduced this year seeking to address the safety of multifamily rental residences. Now that the Governor has signed the Bill, a new section will be added to the California Health and Safety Code, requiring that every 6 years, destructive testing be performed on at least 15% of each type of load-bearing, wood framed exterior elevated element (such as balconies, walkways, and stair landings) in apartment buildings with 3 or more units. Interestingly, prior to being passed by the State Senate, SB 721 was revised in June 2018, such that the inspection requirements do not apply to common interest developments (i.e., condominiums).

    As set forth in the new Health and Safety Code Section 17973:

    "the purpose of the inspection is to determine that exterior elevated elements and their associated waterproofing elements are in a generally safe condition, adequate working order, and free from any hazardous condition caused by fungus, deterioration, decay, or improper alteration to the extent that the life, limb, health, property, safety, or welfare of the public or the occupants is not endangered."

    The inspection must be paid for by the building owner and performed by a licensed contractor, architect, or civil or structural engineer, or a certified building inspector or building official from a recognized state, national, or international association. Emergency repairs identified by the inspector must be made immediately. For non-emergency repairs, a permit must be applied for within 120 days and the repair completed within 120 days of the permit’s issuance. If repairs are not completed within 180 days, civil penalties of $100-$500 per day may be imposed.

    The required inspection must be completed by January 1, 2025 and every 6 years thereafter, unless an equivalent inspection was performed during the 3 years prior to January 1, 2019, the effective date of the new law. For a building converted to condominiums that will be sold after January 1, 2019, the inspection required by Health and Safety Code Section 17973, must be performed prior to the first close of escrow.

    SENATE BILL 1465 SETS CONTRACTOR REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

    The Governor also signed SB 1465, adding Sections 7071.20, 7071.21, and 7071.22 to the California Business and Professions Code. The new law requires that a contractor licensed with the Contractors’ State License Board "report to the registrar in writing within 90 days after the licensee has knowledge of any civil action resulting in a final judgment, executed settlement agreement, or final arbitration award in which the licensee is named as a defendant or crossdefendant, filed on or after January 1, 2019," that meets certain and specific criteria, including that it is over $1 million and arises out of an action for damages to a property or person allegedly caused by specified construction activities of the contractor on a multifamily rental residential structure.

    Where more than one contractor was named as a defendant or cross-defendant, each of the contractors apportioned more than $15,000 in liability must report the action. Importantly, the new statute also imposes similar reporting requirements on insurers of contractors. SB 1465 also addresses an impacted party’s failure to comply with the reporting requirements.

    COMMENT

    Both SB 721 and SB 1465 are potentially significant and seek “legislative reform” to address construction issues by placing a greater burden on apartment owners as well as builders and subcontractors. How pragmatic and what impact they will have on the industry is obviously developing. If you are interested in receiving further detail concerning the Bills, please contact us. We are analyzing the new legislation and its intent and will be providing our ongoing comments.

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of RICHARD H. GLUCKSMAN, ESQ. CHELSEA L. ZWART, ESQ., CGDRB
    Chelsea L. Zwart may be contacted at czwart@cgdrblaw.com

    Bertha – The Tunnel is Finished, but Her Legacy Continues

    September 28, 2017 —
    The Tunnel Boring Machine (“TBM”) known as “Bertha,” built by Hitachi Zosen Corp in Osaka, Japan, was the world’s largest TBM at 57.5 ft. in diameter. The TBM was built to drill the Seattle SR 99 Viaduct replacement tunnel. Seattle Tunnel Partners (“STP”) has a contract with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to dig the two-mile tunnel which is now complete. In December of 2013, tunneling was stopped ostensibly because a 119 ft.-long, eight-inch diameter steel well casing halted the TBM. See 2/15 Blog “Bertha is Stuck and She Remains Mired in Controversy.” Reports are that WSDOT installed the pipe in 2002 to measure groundwater levels and the pipe was allegedly mentioned in the reference material provided to bidders. STP had assumed that the pipe had been removed until the steel casing got stuck in Bertha’s cutting teeth, halting progress. See 1/30/14 Blog “Big Bertha Stuck: Differing Site Condition Principles Revisited.” STP had a design-build contract with WSDOT. The contract contains a Differing Site Conditions (“DSC”) clause pursuant to which if the contractor can prove that the eight-inch pipe was an unforeseen condition (not disclosed in the contract documents), and that the unforeseen condition caused the TBM’s failure, STP is entitled to an equitable adjustment of its contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of John P. Ahlers, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Mr. Ahlers may be contacted at jahlers@ac-lawyers.com