BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington building code compliance expert witnessSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington architectural expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witness public projectsSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington reconstruction 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


    Loan Snarl Punishes Spain Builder Backed by Soros, Gates

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    Manhattan to Add Most Office Space Since ’90 Over 3 Years

    Reasons to Be Skeptical About a Millennial Homebuying Boom in 2016

    Navigating Complex Preliminary Notice Requirements

    Florida Courts Inundated by Wave of New Lawsuits as Sweeping Tort Reform Appears Imminent

    Construction Executives Should Be Dusting Off Employee Handbooks

    What to Look for in Subcontractor Warranty Endorsements

    Beyond the Disneyland Resort: Dining

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

    Unfinished Building Projects Litter Miami

    No Global MDL for COVID Business Interruption Claims, but Panel Will Consider Separate Consolidated Proceedings for Lloyds, Cincinnati, Hartford, Society

    South Carolina “Your Work” Exclusion, “Get To” Costs

    Axa Unveils Plans to Transform ‘Stump’ Into London Skyscraper

    Energy Efficiency Ratings Aren’t Actually Predicting Energy Efficiency

    Hunton Insurance Lawyer, Adriana Perez, Selected to the National Association of Women Lawyers’ 2023 Rising List

    Encinitas Office Obtains Complete Defense Verdict Including Attorney Fees and Costs After Ten Day Construction Arbitration

    Can You Really Be Liable For a Product You Didn’t Make? In New Jersey, the Answer is Yes

    Windstorm Exclusion Found Ambiguous

    Helsinki is Building a Digital Twin of the City

    Home Sales Topping $100 Million Smash U.S. Price Records

    CGL Insurer’s Duty to Defend Insured During Pre-Suit 558 Process: Maybe?

    Buffett Says ‘No-Brainer’ to Get a Mortgage to Short Rates

    Developer Transition - Maryland Condominiums

    Rights Afforded to Employees and Employers During Strikes

    Consider Arbitration Provision in Homebuilder’s Warranty and Purchase-and-Sale Agreement

    Tom Newmeyer Elected Director At Large to the 2017 Orange County Bar Association Board of Directors

    Disrupt a Broken Industry—The Industrial Construction Sandbox

    Contractor Pleads Guilty to Disadvantaged-Business Fraud

    No Coverage For Damage Caused by Chinese Drywall

    County Sovereign Immunity Invokes Change-Order Ordinance

    The Future of Airport Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

    Restaurant Wants SCOTUS to Dust Off Eleventh Circuit’s “Physical Loss” Ruling

    Washington, DC’s COVID-19 Eviction Moratorium Expires

    Nevada State Senator Says HOA Scandal Shows Need for Construction Defect Reform

    Insured's Complaint Against Flood Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable

    Examination of the Product Does Not Stop a Pennsylvania Court From Applying the Malfunction Theory

    Engineer Pauses Fix of 'Sinking' Millennium Tower in San Francisco

    Making the Construction Dispute Resolution Process More Efficient and Less Expensive, Part 2

    Why You May Not Want a Mandatory Mediation Clause in Your Construction Contract

    Save A Legal Fee? Sometimes You Better Talk With Your Construction Attorney

    The Independent Tort Doctrine (And Its Importance)

    Statute of Limitations Upheld in Construction Defect Case

    How VR and AR Will Help in Remote Expert Assistance

    Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Duty to Defend Construction Defect Case

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    Statute of Frauds Applies to Sale of Real Property

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California
    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

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    April 13, 2017 —
    Although we live in a politically-divided nation, there is one issue on which there seems widespread agreement: our country requires a massive upgrade to its infrastructure. Rundown airports, crumbling highways, obsolete ports, and dangerous bridges are now endemic across the United States. By contrast, Asian airports and elegant European bridges and rails show that our country needs an upgrade, the cost of which will be enormous. President Trump promised to revitalize America’s aging roads, bridges, railways, and airports. He chose Wilbur Ross for Commerce Secretary and professor of Conservative Economics and Public Policy, Peter Navarro, to formulate an infrastructure plan. Navarro and Ross recommended that the government allocate $137 billion in tax credits for private investors who underwrite infrastructure projects. They estimate that over the next ten years, the credits could spur $1 trillion in investments. That is how much President Trump promised to spend on infrastructure, a key part of his job-creation plan. His plan involves building the infrastructure with private-money financing. Public Private Partnerships (“PPP”) are not a new concept and have been successful in Canada, Europe, and various U.S. states who have pioneered this method of procurement. Federal tax credits have been used to spur private investment in housing, resulting in tens of thousands of low-income housing developments over the years. The credits are sold to private entities such as banks and equity firms that invest anywhere from $.70 to $1.10 in housing developments for every dollar they receive in credits, a ratio that fluctuates with economic conditions. 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

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    April 27, 2011 —

    In Markel American Ins. Co. v. Lennar Corp., No. 14-10-00008-CV (Tex. Ct. App. April 19, 2011), insured homebuilder Lennar filed suit against its insurer Markel seeking recovery of costs incurred by Lennar to repair water damage to homes resulting from defective EIFS siding. Following a jury trial, judgment was entered in favor of Lennar and against Markel. On appeal, the intermediate appellate court reversed. Applying Texas law, the court first held that Lennar failed to satisfy its burden of allocating damages between covered and uncovered. In a prior decision, the court had held that, while the costs incurred by Lennar for the repair of the resulting water damage

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of CDCoverage.com

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

    Revisiting Statutory Offers to Compromise

    August 28, 2023 —
    The fourth appellate district published an opinion earlier this year in Smalley v. Subaru of America, Inc. (2022) 87 Cal.App.5th 450 that serves as an excellent refresher on requirements of the “998 Offer,” or a statutory offer to compromise pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) §998. In Smalley, set in the context of a Lemon Law action, Defendant Subaru made a 998 Offer for $35,001.00, together with attorneys’ fees and costs totaling either $10,000.00 or costs and reasonably incurred attorneys’ fees, in an amount to be determined by the Court. (Smalley, supra, 87 Cal.App.5th at 454.) Plaintiff objected that the offer was not reasonable and the case proceeded to trial. At trial, a jury found in favor of Plaintiff and awarded him a total judgment award of $27,555.74 – far short of the $35,001.00 offer. The trial court found Plaintiff had failed to beat the 998 at trial and that Subaru’s earlier 998 offer was reasonable. Plaintiff appealed the post-judgment order awarding Plaintiff pre-offer costs and Defendant post-offer costs on the grounds that the 998 was not reasonable in that it did not specify whether Plaintiff would be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of a motion for attorneys’ fees. The fourth district affirmed the trial court’s order and engaged in a helpful review of 998 requirements. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Kathryne Baldwin, Wilke Fleury
    Ms. Baldwin may be contacted at kbaldwin@wilkefleury.com

    Builders Can’t Rely on SB800

    October 01, 2013 —
    In coming to their ruling on SB800, the California Court of Appeals looked to the legislative intent behind the law. Valentine Hoy, Timothy Hutter, and Erin Sedloff of Allen Matkins, in an article on the ruling, note that SB800 was written in response to Aas v. Superior Court, in which the court found that there was no remedy for construction defects that had not resulted in property damage. In the latest ruling, Liberty Mutual v. Brookfield Crystal Cove, LLC, the court concluded that SB800 was passed to give homeowners a way to address defects that had not lead to damage. However, the court also concluded that the legislature did not intend for SB800 to be the only remedy. In Liberty Mutual, the insurance company sought reimbursement for claims it had paid on a homeowner’s claim after a fire sprinkler pipe burst. Liberty Mutual had insured the homeowner and sought repayment from the builder. Escrow had closed on the home in 2004, the pipe burst in 2008, and Liberty Mutual filed their claim in 2011, seven years after the close of escrow. But for plumbing issues, SB800 has a four-year statute of limitations. The writers describe California as “a hotbed for construction defect litigation.” Due to the Liberty Mutual ruling, developers now “cannot rely on the statutes of limitation set forth in SB800.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Trial Date Discussed for Las Vegas HOA Takeover Case

    February 04, 2014 —
    Jeff German of the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that Justice Department attorneys filed papers January 28th demanding the trial involving 11 defendants charged in a scheme to take over the Las Vegas Valley homeowners associations to be held no later than September 2nd. The prosecutors claimed “they have gone out of their way to ease the burden on the defense as they have turned over mountains of evidence in the past year.” However, the defense attorneys allege that they need “at least a year and likely more time” to go through the “more than 3 million pages of documents” and to create a trial strategy, according to German. The defense “asked for an initial late January 2015 trial date.” The case involves charges against “lawyers, former police officers and corrupt board members” for “packing HOA boards to gain legal and construction defect contracts for themselves.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Endorsement to Insurance Policy Controls

    March 28, 2022 —
    I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: an insurance policy is a complicated reading and this reading gets compounded with endorsements that modify aspects of the policy. What you think may be covered may in fact not be covered by virtue of an endorsement to the insurance policy. This is why when you request an insurance policy you want to see the policy PLUS all endorsements to the policy. And when you analyze a policy, you need to do so with a full reading of the endorsements. An endorsement to an insurance policy will control over conflicting language in the policy. Geovera Speciality Ins. Co. v. Glasser, 47 Fla.L.Weekly D436a (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (citation omitted). The homeowner’s insurance coverage dispute in Glasser illustrates this point. Here, the policy had a water loss exclusion. There was an exception to the exclusion for an accidental discharge or overflow of water from a plumbing system on the premises. But there was an endorsement. The endorsement modified the water loss exclusion to clarify that the policy excluded water damage “in any form, including but not limited to….” Examples were then given which did not include the accidental discharge or overflow of water from a plumbing system. 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

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    December 08, 2016 —
    As an update to our prior alert, on November 16, 2016, a federal judge in Texas issued a permanent injunction blocking the U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) “persuader rule” – a preliminary injunction had been granted this past June. In rendering the permanent injunction, the court adopted the reasoning of its prior June 27, 2016 decision that granted a nationwide preliminary injunction on the rule. In the earlier decision, the court held that a temporary injunction was appropriate because the parties challenging the rule were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim […]. Reprinted courtesy of Aaron C. Schlesinger, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. and Gregory R. Begg, Peckar & Abramson, P.C. Mr. Schlesinger may be contacted at aschlesinger@pecklaw.com Mr. Begg may be contacted at gbegg@pecklaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Bad Welds Doom Art Installation at Central Park

    October 30, 2013 —
    Last year, the sculpture “How I Roll” was supposed to be doing its rolling at Central Park from June through August of last year, but the exhibit was taken down a month early, over concerns that the welding had rendered the moving piece “structurally unsound and unsafe.” Now the Public Art Fund is suing the company hired to do the welding. Titon Builders of Lake Park, Florida was supposed to do the welding, but they subcontracted the work to Tru-Steel Corp. of Fort Pierce, Florida. The Public Art Fund is claiming that Titon’s contract obligated them to do the fabrication, not subcontract it. Jeffrey Klein, a lawyer for the Public Art Fund, said, “it’s sad that it had to be taken down because of shoddy workmanship.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of