BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing 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 production housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington building code compliance expert witnessSeattle Washington consulting general contractorSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington construction code expert witnessSeattle Washington hospital construction 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


    Texas “your work” exclusion

    Arizona Supreme Court Leaves Limits on Construction Defects Unclear

    California Court Broadly Interprets Insurance Policy’s “Liability Arising Out of” Language

    Reports of the Death of SB800 are Greatly Exaggerated – The Court of Appeal Revives Mandatory SB800 Procedures

    Attorney-Client Privilege in the Age of Cyber Breaches

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    Considering Stormwater Management

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

    Nine Firm Members Recognized as Super Lawyers or Rising Stars

    Project Labor Agreements Will Now Be Required for Large-Scale Federal Construction Projects

    Are Construction Defect Laws Inhibiting the Development of Attached Ownership Housing in Colorado?

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Florida Governor Bans Foreign Citizens From Buying Land in Florida

    Does the UCC Apply to the Contract for the Sale of Goods and Services

    What Contractors Can Do to Address Rising Material Costs

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

    Building on New Risks: Construction in the Age of Greening

    Slip and Fall Claim from Standing Water in Parking Garage

    Colorado statutory “property damage” caused by an “occurrence”

    Best Practices: Commercial Lockouts in Arizona

    Litigation Privilege Saves the Day for Mechanic’s Liens

    Florida Adopts Daubert Standard for Expert Testimony

    Crossrail Audit Blames Busted Budget and Schedule on Mismanagement

    Should a Subcontractor provide bonds to a GC who is not himself bonded? (Bonding Agent Perspective)

    The Show Must Go On: Navigating Arbitration in the Wake of the COVID-19 Outbreak

    LEED Certified Courthouse Square Negotiating With Insurers, Mulling Over Demolition

    How the Science of Infection Can Make Cities Stronger

    Guilty Pleas Draw Renewed Interest In Nevada’s Construction Defect Laws

    Three Attorneys Named Among The Best Lawyers in America 2018

    Unbilled Costs Remain in Tutor Perini's Finances

    Big Builder’s Analysis of the Top Ten Richest Counties

    How BIM Helps Make Buildings Safer

    U.S. Architecture Firms’ Billing Index Faster in Dec.

    New Report Reveals Heavy Civil Construction Less Impacted by COVID-19 Than Commercial Construction

    Judicial Panel Denies Nationwide Consolidation of COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases

    Following Mishaps, D.C. Metro Presses on With Repairs

    Pandemic Magnifies Financial Risk in Construction: What Executives Can Do to Speed up Customer Payments

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

    OSHA Again Pushes Back Record-Keeping Rule Deadline

    Prevailing HOAs Not Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees in Enforcement Actions Brought Under Davis-Stirling

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    U.S. State Adoption of the National Electrical Code

    Judgment for Insurer Reversed Due to Failure to Establish Depreciation

    Liquidated Damages: Too High and It’s a Penalty. Too Low and You’re Out of Luck.

    Connecticut District Court to Review Proposed Class Action in Defective Concrete Suit

    Condo Board May Be Negligent for not Filing Construction Defect Suit in a Timely Fashion

    Delaware Settlements with Minors and the Uniform Transfer to Minor Act

    Happenings in and around the West Coast Casualty Seminar

    Hawaii Supreme Court Tackles "Other Insurance" Issues

    Insurers Need only Prove that Other Coverage Exists for Construction Defect Claims
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    Leveraging from more than 7,000 construction defect and claims related expert witness designations, the Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group provides a wide range of trial support and consulting services to Seattle's most acknowledged construction practice groups, CGL carriers, builders, owners, and public agencies. Drawing from a diverse pool of construction and design professionals, BHA is able to simultaneously analyze complex claims from the perspective of design, engineering, cost, or standard of care.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Ninth Circuit Affirms Duty to Defend CERCLA Section 104 (e) Letter

    October 10, 2013 —
    The Ninth Circuit held there is a duty to defend not only a PRP letter issued by the EPA, but also a section 104 (e) letter. Anderson Brothers, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18156 (9th Cir. Aug. 30, 2013). The insured received two letters from the EPA notifying it of potential liability under CERCLA for environmental contamination of the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. The first letter was received in January 2008, and stated that the EPA sought the insured's cooperation in its investigation of the release of hazardous substances at the site. The letter enclosed an extensive, 82-question "Information Request" seeking information about the insured's current and former activities at the site. The letter informed the insured that its voluntary cooperation was sought, but compliance with the Information Request was required by law and failure to respond could result in an enforcement action and civil penalties of $32,500 per day. The insured tendered the 104 (e) letter to St. Paul and requested a defense and indemnity pursuant to the CGL policy. St. Paul declined to provide a defense because the letter did not constitute a "suit," which was required by the policy to trigger the duty to defend. The second letter from the EPA, received in November 2009, was entitled "General Notice Letter for the Portland Superfund Site" and notified the insured that it was a "potentially responsible party ("PRP"). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly
    Tred Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    As Some States Use the Clean Water Act to Delay Energy Projects, EPA Issues New CWA 401 Guidance

    August 26, 2019 —
    In just the past few weeks, three states have used their Clean Water Act 401 authority to delay, for an indefinite period, FERC-authorized pipeline expansion projects. On May 6, 2019, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality denied, without prejudice, Jordan Cove’s application for a Section 401 water quality certification. Jordan Cove plans to build an LNG export terminal at Coos Bay, Oregon, if it can obtain the necessary federal and permits. Under Section 401(a) of the Clean Water Act, any applicant for a federal permit to conduct any activity, including the operation of facilities which may result in any discharge into the navigable waters, shall provide the permitting agency a certification from the State in which the discharge may originate that any such discharge will comply with the applicable provisions of the Clean Water Act, including effluent limitations and state water quality standards. The States have a “reasonable time”—which shall not exceed one year after the receipt of the 401 application—in which to act, or the state’s authority may be waived by this inaction. The Oregon DEQ concluded that Jordan Cove has not demonstrated that its project, as presently configured, will satisfy state water quality standards. The 401 applications submitted by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. (Transco) to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the New York State Department of Environmental Protection were similarly rejected without prejudice on May 15, 2019 (New York) and June 5, 2019 (New Jersey). This use of the states’ 401 authority has frustrated plans to build and operate LNG pipelines around the country. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    A Lack of Sophistication With the Construction Contract Can Play Out In an Ugly Dispute

    November 07, 2022 —
    There are times where a lack of sophistication can come back to haunt you. This is not referring to a lack of sophistication of the parties. The parties, themselves, could be quite sophisticated. This is referring to a lack of sophistication with the construction contract forming the basis of the relationship. While parties don’t always want to buy into the contract drafting and negotiation process, it is oftentimes the first document reviewed. Because contract terms and conditions are important. They govern the relationship, the risk, scope, amount, and certain outcomes with disputes. However, a lack of sophistication can play out when that contract that should govern the relationship, the risk, the scope, the amount, and certain outcomes doesn’t actually do that, or if it does, it does it poorly. An example of how bad a dispute can play out when it comes to the lack of sophistication on the front end is Avant Design Group, Inc. v. Aquastar Holdings, LLC, 2022 WL 6852227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), where a cost-plus contract was treated as a lump sum contract. Here, an owner planned to perform an extensive interior build-out to a residential unit. The owner had an out-of-country architect; because the architect was not licensed in Florida, the owner hired a local architect/designer to oversee construction and obtain goods and services for the residential interior build-out. The contract was nothing but a proposal of items and costs. The proposal stated the owner “would pay the cost of goods and services of the vendors, plus pay a ‘20% Interior Design & Administrative Fee’” to the local designer. Avant Design Group, 2022 WL at *1. The proposal further stated, “This preliminary budget of the Client’s construction costs include [sic] anticipated costs for construction materials, labor and sales tax. Any other cost, including but not limited to freight, cartage, shipping, receiving, storage and delivery are not included in the preliminary budget and will be invoiced separately.” Id., n.2. 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

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    September 03, 2015 —
    New York’s first real estate project financed significantly though crowdfunding is set to open, a step forward for a nascent investing model that has yet to prove itself in commercial property. AKA United Nations, an extended-stay hotel-condominium on East 46th Street near Second Avenue, will start taking guests Sept. 10. Sales of the suites have already begun. Of the $95 million it cost to buy and fix up the existing hotel, $12 million was raised from online pledges. It’s “the first ever crowdfunded building in New York coming to completion, from A to Z,” said Rodrigo Nino, chief executive officer of Prodigy Network, which is gut-renovating the building with partners. Until now, “everything has been about promises.” Reprinted courtesy of David M. Levitt, Bloomberg and Oshrat Carmiel, Bloomberg Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Morrison Bridge Allegedly Crumbling

    February 05, 2015 —
    The Portland Mercury reported that the Portland, Oregon Morrison Bridge’s structure is breaking into pieces. "The bridge is crumbling," Joel Mullin, attorney from Stoel Rives representing the county told a Multnomah County judge, according to the Portland Mercury. "The deterioration has accelerated more than anticipated." Newly released documents seem to imply that the bridge “project was doomed well before it started, and county officials should have known it,” the Portland Mercury reported. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Benefits and Pitfalls of Partnerships Between Companies

    December 21, 2016 —
    To bring innovations to the market, companies almost always need partnerships. Partnerships can offer scalability, productivity, and open up new markets. However, partnerships are not easy to establish and manage. The benefits of partnering Construction companies have always done joint ventures. The reason has been to simply be able to bid for and deliver a project that would be too big for one company at that specific moment. Partnering allows you to become larger than you are and to get work that would otherwise be out of your reach. It also lets you spread the risk in a demanding project among the members. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Aarni Heiskanen, AEC Business
    Mr. Heiskanen may be contacted at aarni@aepartners.fi

    Best Lawyers® Recognizes 45 White and Williams Lawyers

    September 25, 2023 —
    Thirty-two White and Williams lawyers were recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024. Inclusion in Best Lawyers® is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers® employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of quality legal services. In addition, thirteen lawyers were recognized as Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America. This recognition is given to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. The firm is also pleased to announce Best Lawyers® has recognized Christopher P. Leise as a 2024 "Lawyer of the Year" for Litigation – Insurance in Cherry Hill, NJ. Chris works with regional and national brokerage firms defending professional liability claims and handling disputes with insurance companies throughout the mid-Atlantic region, as well as with commercial insurance carriers defending allegations of bad faith. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of White and Williams LLP

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    February 06, 2019 —
    On December 3, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a Federal Register notice advising the regulated community that EPA’s controversial Clean Air Act (CAA) stationary source Risk Management Program (RMP) rules are effective as of December 3, 2018 – the Final Rule: Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air Act (83 FR 62268). The initial package of the RMP rules was promulgated in 1996, but a series of chemical explosions prompted the development of new rules, whose process safety, third party auditing, emergency response, preparedness and information sharing provisions were designed to confront these challenges. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com