BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington civil engineer expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failureSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witnessesSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestration
    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


    MetLife Takes Majority Stake in New San Francisco Office Tower

    Toward Increased Citizen Engagement in Urban Planning

    Halliburton to Pay $1.1 Billion to Settle Spill Lawsuits

    Subrogation 101 (and Why Should I Care?)

    President Trump Issued Two New EOs on Energy Infrastructure and Federal Energy Policy

    Damron Agreement Questioned in Colorado Casualty Insurance v Safety Control Company, et al.

    Skanska Found Negligent for Damages From Breakaway Barges

    Duty To Defend PFAS MDL Lawsuits: Texas Federal Court Weighs In

    ASCE Statement on EPA Lead Pipe and Paint Action Plan

    South African Building Industry in Line for More State Support

    Does Stricter Decertification Mean More “Leedigation?”

    House Passes Bill to Delay EPA Ozone Rule

    A Court-Side Seat: Recent Legal Developments at Supreme and Federal Appeals Courts

    Taking Care of Infrastructure – Interview with Marilyn Grabowski

    Award Doubled in Retrial of New Jersey Elevator Injury Case

    The EPA and the Corps of Engineers Propose Another Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”

    Business Risk Exclusions (j) 5 and (j) 6 Found Ambiguous

    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

    Insurance Companies Score Win at Supreme Court

    Ex-Construction Firm That Bought a $75m Michelangelo to Delist

    OSHA Finalizes Rule on Crane Operator Qualification and Certification

    SFAA Commends U.S. House for Passage of Historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

    Presidential Memorandum Promotes Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West

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

    Engineer Proposes Slashing Scope of Millennium Tower Pile Upgrade

    Las Vegas Partner Sarah Odia Named a 2023 Mountain States Super Lawyer Rising Star

    The Right to Repair Act (Civ.C §895 et seq.) Applies and is the Exclusive Remedy for a Homeowner Alleging Construction Defects

    Affordable Global Housing Will Cost $11 Trillion

    CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under Limited Circumstances

    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    New Member Added to Seattle Law Firm Williams Kastner

    Burden to Prove Exception to Exclusion Falls on Insured

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    Will European Insurers’ Positive Response to COVID-19 Claims Influence US Insurers?

    1 De Haro: A Case Study on Successful Cross-Laminated Timber Design and Construction in San Francisco

    Texas exclusions j(5) and j(6).

    Aecmaster’s Digital Twin: A New Era for Building Design

    Insurance Law Alert: California Appeals Court Allows Joinder of Employee Adjuster to Bad Faith Lawsuit Against Homeowners Insurer

    Sureties and Bond Producers May Be Liable For a Contractor’s False Claims Act Violations

    The Harmon Hotel Construction Defect Trial to Begin

    Risk Protection: Force Majeure Agreements Take on Renewed Relevance

    Congratulations to BWB&O’s Newport Beach Team on Obtaining a Defense Verdict in Favor of their Subcontractor Client!

    Traub Lieberman Partner Colleen Hastie Wins Summary Judgment in Favor of Sub-Contracted Electrical Company

    Connecting Construction Project Information: Open Technology Databases Improve Project Communication, Collaboration and Visibility

    Adaptive Reuse: Creative Reimagining of Former Office Space to Address Differing Demands

    Haight has been named a Metropolitan Los Angeles Tier 1 “Best Law Firm” and Tier 2 for Los Angeles and Orange County by U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” in 2022

    Suit Against Broker for Securing Inadequate Coverage Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

    Reporting Requirements for Architects under California Business and Professions Code Section 5588

    Finalists in San Diego’s Moving Parklet Design Competition Announced

    Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Not Ripe Until Underlying Lawsuit Against Insured Resolved
    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

    Nevada Lawmakers Had Private Meetings on Construction Defects

    February 21, 2013 —
    Both Democratic and Republican members of the Nevada legislature had closed door meetings with representatives of the construction industry. Democratic lawmakers also met with the other side of the discussion over construction defect laws, lobbyists representing trial lawyers. When asked by the Las Vegas Sun why this was done in private meetings instead of a public hearing, Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick didn’t have an answer, other than that “everyone in the building did it yesterday.” The meetings were described as briefings on general policy issues, offering legislators a chance to ask questions. The Sun notes that under Nevada’s open meeting law, government agencies would not be allowed to do this in a closed meeting, but that the legislature exempted itself from the law. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    What is the Effect of an Untimely Challenge to the Timeliness of a Trustee’s Sale?

    April 13, 2017 —
    Ever wonder what happens if a person challenges the timeliness of a trustee’s sale after the sale already occurred? Waiver of the argument of course! And, in the case of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Waltner, the affirmance of an eviction judgment. In the Waltner case, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-PR4 Trust (the “Bank”), purchased a residential property at a trustee’s sale in September 2015. The Bank gave the occupant of the house, Sarah Waltner (“Waltner”), notice to vacate the property, but she did not do so. Accordingly, the Bank filed a summary action to evict Waltner, which the trial court ultimately granted. After the trial court granted the Bank relief, Waltner filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to vacate the eviction judgment arguing, among other things, that the judgment was void because the Bank conducted the trustee’s sale after the statute of limitations expired. Both motions were denied, and Waltner appealed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    Disjointed Proof of Loss Sufficient

    June 11, 2014 —
    The court found that when considered as a whole, separately filed proofs of loss and estimates of damage were sufficient to meet the requirements of a flood policy. Young v. Imperial Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51863 (April 15, 2014). On August 29, 2012, plaintiffs' property sustained flood damage due to Hurricane Isaac. After Imperial's adjustor inspected the property, advance payments were made for $5000 under the building coverage and $5000 under the contents coverage. On October 26, 2012, the plaintiffs' adjustor submitted a proof of loss for building damages, stating the amount of loss was $175,100, which was the policy limit minus the deductible. The insured wife signed the proof of loss. The actual case value, full cost of replacement or repair, and applicable depreciation were listed "undetermined." 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

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    December 19, 2018 —
    The Arizona Court of Appeals recently held that any successful plaintiff in a forcible detainer action (i.e., an eviction action) may recover an award of its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred at trial under A.R.S. § 12-1178(A). See Bank of New York v. Dodev, 1 CA-CV 17-0652 (Ct. App. Nov. 20, 2018). Prior to this decision, caselaw held that fees were only awardable in actions arising out of the termination of a residential lease. RREEF Mgmt. Co. v. Camex Prods., Inc., 190 Ariz. 75, 945 P.2d 386 (Ct. App. 1997). Changes to the statute, however, rendered the prior caselaw obsolete. Although the holding in Dodev is important, the facts of the case are truly astonishing…and somewhat depressing. The Facts In Dodev, Ivaylo Dodev (Dodev) defaulted on his home loan in 2008. He nevertheless “succeeded in remaining on the [p]roperty by filing numerous legal actions that delayed the foreclosure and subsequent trustee’s sale” at least through the date of the opinion—a ten (10) year period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    New Member Added to Seattle Law Firm Williams Kastner

    May 21, 2014 —
    Attorney Todd W. Blischke has become a member of Seattle, Washington’s Williams Kastner law firm, according to Herald Online. Blishcke, who “has experience representing contractors, sureties, real estate developers, public agencies and private owners” will “chair the firm’s Construction Litigation and Surety Practices Team.” “Todd is an excellent addition to the firm’s Seattle office, and we are thrilled to have him on board,” said Jessie Harris, Managing Director of Williams Kastner, as quoted by Herald Online. “His years of experience in construction and surety matters will be an asset to Williams Kastner’s established construction litigation practice.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    August 27, 2014 —
    In Martinez v. Aero Caribbean (No. 3:11-cv-03194-WHA, filed 8/21/2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held service of process on a corporation's officer, within the forum state, does not establish general personal jurisdiction over the corporation unless the corporation's contacts with the forum render it essentially at home in the state. Decedent, Lorenzo Corazon Mendoza, was traveling by airplane when the plane crashed, killing everyone aboard. Defendant Avions De Transport Régional (ATR) manufactured the airplane that crashed. Plaintiffs Lorenzo Martinez, Eliezer Martinez, Eliu Mendoza and Gloria Montes (Plaintiffs) filed suit against ATR as heirs of decedent. ATR is a business entity organized under French law with its principal place of business in France. It is not licensed to do business in California, and it has no office or other physical presence there. It has purchased parts from California suppliers, sent representatives to California to promote its business, and advertised in trade publications available in California. It has also sold airplanes to a California corporation. Empire Airlines flies from Santa Barbara to Ontario using ATR planes on a regular basis; however, Empire Airlines purchased the ATR planes secondhand from third parties, and never directly from ATR. At the time of the crash, ATR North America (a wholly owned subsidiary of ATR) had its headquarters in Virginia, and has since relocated to Florida. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    October 17, 2022 —
    The construction industry has traditionally been slow to adapt to new technologies, but things are changing. Construction companies are keen to control costs (including increased costs due to supply chain issues), improve efficiency, maintain productivity while dealing with labor shortages, and enhance safety, and protect data bases from cyberattacks. New technologies, including robotics, 3D printing, cloud and mobile computing, augmented reality, blockchain, and cybersecurity, are helping construction companies achieve those goals. Here are some key takeaways. Augmented Reality (AR) vs. Virtual Reality Augmented Reality is a technology that superimposes a computer generated image upon a user’s view of the real work. Virtual Reality, on the other hand, creates a virtual environment to replace the real one. AR has uses in many industries. For example, shoppers using AR can see what furniture or appliances will look like in their own homes and offices. Medical professionals can also use the technology to visualize organs and simulate procedures prior to operations. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Sarah B. Biser, Fox Rothschild LLP (ConsensusDocs)
    Ms. Biser may be contacted at sbiser@foxrothschild.com

    Defining Catastrophic Injury Claims

    December 16, 2019 —
    How do we define circumstances and injuries that go beyond a typical claim and severely impact a person’s life? How do we characterize the types of claims where an individual’s enjoyment of life is affected in an extraordinary manner? Typically, attorneys refer to these types of cases as “catastrophic injury” claims. These are the type of personal injury claims where the health of an individual has been so seriously impacted that their life has been irreparably altered. Defining these claims legally is somewhat murky and case law has done little to provide attorneys with a specific definition of the term. However, a recent Workers Compensation Appeals Board ruling attempted to list factors in order to establish a catastrophic injury claim. These include:
    1. An intensity and seriousness of treatment received for an injury;
    2. The ultimate outcome when a person’s physical injury is permanent and stationary;
    3. Whether the severity of the physical injury impacts the person’s ability to perform daily activities;
    4. Whether the physical injury is closely analogous to one of the injuries specified in various statutes, including loss of a limb, paralysis, severe burns, or a severe head injury; and
    5. If the physical injury is incurable or progressive. Wilson v. State of California CAL Fire (5/10/19) 2019 Cal.Wrk.Comp. LEXIS 29.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP