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


    The Coverage Fun House Mirror: When Things Are Not What They Seem

    The Final Nail: Ongoing Repairs Do Not Toll the Statute of Repose

    General Contractor’s Excess Insurer Denied Equitable Contribution From Subcontractor’s Excess Insurer

    New York’s Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Act Imposes Increased Disclosure Requirements On Defendants at the Beginning of Lawsuits

    Cerberus, Blackstone Loosening Credit for U.S. Landlords

    Pennsylvania Civil Engineers Give the State's Infrastructure a "C-" Grade

    How to Protect a Construction-Related Invention

    Pending Sales of Existing Homes in U.S. Decline for Eighth Month

    New WA Law Caps Retainage on Private Projects at 5%

    Toll Plans to Boost New York Sales With Pricing, Incentives

    Five Types of Structural Systems in High Rise Buildings

    ENR Northwest’s Top Contractors Survey Reveals Regional Uptick

    This Is the Most Remote and Magical Hotel on Earth

    COVID-19 Response: California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board Implements Sweeping New Regulations to Prevent COVID-19 in the Workplace

    Collapse of Improperly Built Deck Not An Occurrence

    More Construction Defects for San Francisco’s Eastern Bay Bridge Expansion

    Supplement to New California Construction Laws for 2019

    Celebrities Lose Case in Construction Defect Arbitration

    Mercury News Editorial Calls for Investigation of Bay Bridge Construction

    A Guide to California’s Changes to Civil Discovery Rules

    Best Practices After Receiving Notice of a Construction Claim

    And the Winner Is . . . The Right to Repair Act!

    Flexible Seattle Off-Ramp Would Retain Shape in Quake

    Roof Mounted Solar Panels: Lower Your Risk of Fire

    US Appeals Court Slams FERC on Long-Muddled State Environmental Permits

    Home Builders Wear Many Hats

    Breach Of Duty of Good Faith And Fair Dealing Packaged With Contract Disputes Act Claim

    Coverage for Faulty Workmanship Found In South Dakota

    Sinking Floor Does Not Meet Strict Definition of Collapse

    Women Make Slow Entry into Building Trades

    Florida Issues Emergency Fraud Prevention Rule to Protect Policyholders in Wake of Catastrophic Storms

    Trial Date Discussed for Las Vegas HOA Takeover Case

    Governor Signs Permit Extension Bill Extending Permit Deadlines to One Year

    Beyond Inverse Condemnation in Wildfire Litigation: An Oregon Jury Finds Utility Liable for Negligence, Trespass and Nuisance

    Construction Up in Northern Ohio

    Insured's Expert Qualified, Judgment for Coverage Affirmed

    Manhattan Trophy Home Sellers Test Buyer Limits on Price

    9 Positive Housing Statistics by Builder

    Workplace Safety–the Unpreventable Employee Misconduct Defense

    Texas Condo Construction Defect Code Amended

    Virtual Mediation – How Do I Make It Work for Me?

    Will On-Site Robotics Become Feasible in Construction?

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

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

    Insurer Has Duty to Defend Sub-Contractor

    Waive Your Claim Goodbye: Louisiana Court Holds That AIA Subrogation Waiver Did Not Violate Anti-Indemnification Statute and Applied to Subcontractors

    Fourth Circuit Finds Insurer Reservation of Rights Letters Inadequate to Preserve Coverage Defenses Under South Carolina Law

    Court of Appeal Holds Only “Named Insureds” May Sue for Bad Faith Under California FAIR Plan Policy

    Construction Termination Issues Part 5: What if You are the One that Wants to Quit?

    Product Defect Allegations Trigger Duty To Defend in Pennsylvania
    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

    Court of Appeals Discusses Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Public Works Contracting

    August 17, 2017 —
    The implied duty of good faith and fair dealing is implied in every contract, including construction contracts. Generally speaking, this implied duty requires parties cooperate with one another so that they each obtain the full benefit of their contracted bargain. Recently, the Court of Appeals (Division II) in Nova Contracting, Inc. v. City of Olympia discussed this duty’s application to a public works contract. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lindsay K. Taft, Ahlers & Cressman PLLC
    Ms. Taft may be contacted at ltaft@ac-lawyers.com

    Recording a Lis Pendens Is Crucial

    January 04, 2023 —
    If you are in a construction dispute where you are pursuing a construction lien foreclosure action, recording a lis pendens is crucial. Did I say crucial? “[O]ne purpose of a notice of lis pendens is to alert all others that title to the property is involved in litigation and that ‘future purchasers or encumbrancers of that property’ are at risk of being bound by an adverse judgment.” Henry v. AIM Industries, LLC, 47 Fla.L.Weekly D653b (Fla. 2d DCA 2022). There really is never a reason not to record a lis pendens when pursing a construction lien foreclosure. Please remember that – don’t forget to record the lis pendens! There are times a lis pendens is recorded when the lis pendens is NOT based on a duly recorded instrument (e.g., construction lien or mortgage). A lis pendens, however, is recorded because the dispute is tied to the property in which the lis pendens is being recorded. The lis pendens is recorded to best safeguard the plaintiff’s interest in the real property without fear that the real property will be sold impacting the purpose (and, of course, security) of the lawsuit. 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

    Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera Obtain Voluntary Dismissal in Favor of Construction Company Under the Vertical Immunity Doctrine

    June 21, 2024 —
    In a lawsuit filed in Orange County, Traub Lieberman Partner Michael Logan and Associate Christian Romaguera achieved a voluntary dismissal in favor of their Client, a construction company. The Plaintiff claimed that he was seriously and permanently injured, and demanded $1,000,000.00. The Plaintiff turned out to be an employee of our Client’s subcontractor, and the Plaintiff received worker’s compensation benefits from his employer, the subcontractor. Under Florida Statute § 440.11(1), “The liability of an employer . . . shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability, including vicarious liability, of such employer to any third-party tortfeasor and to the employee . . .” When a subcontractor provides workers’ compensation benefits to its injured employee, workers’ compensation immunity would not only apply to the subcontractor but to the general contractor as well. This is also known as “vertical immunity.” The Traub Lieberman team filed a detailed motion and memorandum of law to argue its case, and the Plaintiff voluntarily withdrew the claim against the Client just before that motion was set to be argued before the Judge. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Christian Romaguera, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Romaguera may be contacted at cromaguera@tlsslaw.com

    Bad Faith in the First Party Insurance Context

    December 15, 2016 —
    In a previous article I discussed bad faith when it comes to an insurance claim. Recently, in Barton v. Capitol Preferred Insurance Co., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2736b (Fla. 5th DCA 2016), the court discussed bad faith in the first-party insurance context (i.e., a property / homeowners insurance policy). In this case, homeowners, as the insured, sued their homeowners insurance carrier for sinkhole coverage. The homeowner filed a Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violation (also known as a Civil Remedy Notice) against their insurer with the Florida Department of Insurance in accordance with Florida Statute s. 624.155. This Civil Remedy Notice is a prerequisite to initiating such a bad faith claim; the notice specifies the statutory violations committed by the insurer and gives the insurer 60 days to cure the violation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Florida Construction Legal Updates
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    Water Damage Sub-Limit Includes Tear-Out Costs

    June 06, 2022 —
    The Florida Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling that the homeowner policy's sub-limit for water damage included tear-out costs. Sec. First Ins. Co. v. Vazquez, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 1205 (Fla. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 2022). A discharge of water from the cast iron pipes caused damage to the home. The water escaped as a result of the failed cast iron pipes due to wear and tear, deterioration, and corrosion. The insurer acknowledged coverage for the water damage and paid $10,000 under the Limited Water Damage Endorsement (LWD Endorsement). The provision recited that "'[t]he limit of liability for all damage to covered property provided by this endorsement is $10,000 per loss." The insureds' suit argued they were entitled to additional benefits for the cost to tear out and replace a part of the concrete slab - an action necessary to reach the corroded pipes. The parties stipulated that the cost of the tear-out would be $40,000. The parties agreed that the LWD Endorsement provided coverage of both water damage and tear-out costs. They also agreed that the cost to repair and/or replace the corroded pipes was not covered. They disagreed, however, over the proper interpretation of the limitation of liability provision in the LWD Endorsement. The insured argued that the $10,000 limit applied to both water damage and tear-out costs. The insureds argued that the $10,00 limit applied only to water damage to covered property. 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

    Negligent Misrepresentation in Sale of Building Altered without Permits

    September 30, 2011 —

    The Supreme Court of New Hampshire has ruled in the case Wyle v. Lees. The Leeses owned a two-unit apartment building in North Conway, New Hampshire. They hired a contractor to add a third, larger apartment, including a two-car garage. The Leeses and their contractor submitted a building permit application. They were informed that site plan review was required. After receiving approval on the site plan, construction started. At no point did they obtain a building permit and the construction was never inspected. The Leeses subsequently added more space to the unit, reducing parking spaces below the minimum required. Again, they did not obtain a building permit.

    In 2007, three years after all these changes were complete, the Leeses sold their building to Mr. Wyle. To the question “are you aware of any modifications or repairs made without the necessary permits?” they answered “no.” About six weeks after closing, Wyle “received a letter from the town code enforcement officer regarding the legality of the removal of a garage door from the new unit.” A subsequent inspection revealed “numerous building and life safety code violations.”

    Mr. Wyle brought a claim against the Leeses for negligent misrepresentation. The defendants filed a motion “seeking to preclude economic loss damages.” At a two-day bench trial, Mr. Wyle won. The Leeses appealed.

    The appeals court found that “the defendants negligently misrepresented that the premises were licensed for immediate occupancy and that the defendants had obtained all necessary permits,” and thus upheld the lower court’s finding of negligent misrepresentation. The appeals court also rejected the Leeses’ argument that damages must be apportioned on all parties, including “the plaintiff himself, the plaintiff’s building inspector, and the defendant’s contractor,” finding a lack of “adequate evidence.”

    The Leeses further argued that they were unaware that modifications and repairs were accomplished without the required permits. The appeals court noted that “the trial court found that both the conditional approval and final approval for the site plan stated that a building permit and a certificate of occupancy were required prior to any use.” The court concluded that the Leeses “knew or should have known of the falsity of their representation.”

    The appeals affirmed the findings of the trial court.

    Read the court’s decision…

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

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    June 21, 2017 —
    Loss of the insured's home caused by a renter who demolished the home was covered under the homeowner's policy. Fisher v. Garrison Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 Idaho LEXIS 143 (Idaho May 26, 2017). The insured, Shammie L. Fisher, entered a Purchase Agreement to sell her home to Ron Reynoso. The purchase of the property was contingent upon Reynoso obtaining financing. Before completing the purchase, he would lease the property. The Agreement stated, "Buyer intends to make certain improvements to the property upon possession, with the intent to sell the property for a profit." Within two months of renting the property to Reynoso, Fisher learned that he had demolished the entire house down to the foundation. He then ceased work and left. Fisher made a claim under her policy, but Garrison Property and Casualty Insurance Company denied coverage based upon the exclusion for faulty, inadequate or defective work. When Fisher sued, the trial court granted summary judgment to Garrison. 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

    Columbus, Ohio’s Tallest Building to be Inspected for Construction Defects

    July 16, 2014 —
    Fox 28 news reported that “[t]he state of Ohio is going to spend more than $166,000 to inspect…the 40-year-old Rhodes Tower” in Columbus. "They're going to look at the exterior of the building - [at] sealants between the joints, the condition of the panels, the window systems, how they're draining, how they're operating, and how they're sealed," Ned Thiell, of Ohio Facilities Construction Commission, told ABC 6/FOX 28 news. A study completed last year declared there were “’deficiencies’ on the building’s stone covering” and there were “panels with severe fracture defects” that “will need to be replaced with new stone panels.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of