BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    custom homes building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction expertsSeattle Washington architectural engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington construction claims expert witnessSeattle Washington eifs expert witnessSeattle Washington structural concrete expert
    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


    Insurer's Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Failure to Cover Collapse Fails

    Around the State

    Client Alert: Court of Appeal Applies Common Interest Privilege Doctrine to HOA Litigation Meetings

    Additional Insured Obligations and the Underlying Lawsuit

    Public Law Center Honors Snell & Wilmer Partner Sean M. Sherlock As Volunteers For Justice Attorney Of The Year

    Tennessee High Court Excludes Labor Costs from Insurer’s Actual Cash Value Depreciation Calculations

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (5/8/24) – Hotel Labor Disputes, a Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Freddie Mac’s New Policies

    The Difference Between Routine Document Destruction and Spoliation

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Adopts New Rule in Breach-of-the-Consent-to-Settle-Clause Cases

    New York Appellate Court Applies Broad Duty to Defend to Property Damage Case

    Is There a Conflict of Interest When a CD Defense Attorney Becomes Coverage Counsel Post-Litigation?

    Once Again: Contract Terms Matter

    No Coverage for Collapse of Building

    Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Insurer Survives Motion to Dismiss

    Update: New VOSH Maximum Penalties as of July 1

    Construction Injuries Under the Privette Doctrine. An Electrifying, but Perhaps Not Particularly Shocking, Story . . .

    Indemnity Provision Prevails Over "Other Insurance" Clause

    Hawaii Bill Preserves Insurance Coverage in Lava Zones

    Senate Bill 15-091 Passes Out of the Senate State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee

    One More Thing Moving From California to Texas: Wildfire Risk

    San Francisco Sues Over Sinking Millennium Tower

    The Unwavering Un-waivable Implied Warranty of Workmanship and Habitability in Arizona

    OSHA Issues Final Rule on Electronic Submission of Injury and Illness Data

    Nevada’s Construction Defect Law

    Surety’s Several Liability Under Bonds

    Dot I’s and Cross T’s When It Comes to Construction Licensure Requirements

    The Future Has Arrived: New Technologies in Construction

    Association Insurance Company v. Carbondale Glen Lot E-8, LLC: Federal Court Reaffirms That There Is No Duty to Defend or Indemnify A Builder For Defective Construction Work

    MGM Begins Dismantling of the Las Vegas Harmon Tower

    Action Needed: HB24-1230 Spells Trouble for Colorado Construction Industry and its Insurers

    Actual Cost Value Includes Depreciation of Repair Labor Costs

    Ninth Circuit Holds that 1993 Budget Appropriations Language Does Not Compel the Corps of Engineers to use 1987 Wetlands Guidance Indefinitely

    Peckar & Abramson Once Again Recognized Among Construction Executive’s “Top 50 Construction Law Firms™”

    New Executive Order: Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All

    Rio de Janeiro's Bursting Real-Estate Bubble

    Update Regarding New York’s New Registration Requirement for Contractors and Subcontractors Performing Public Works and Covered Private Projects

    Ninth Circuit Finds Policy’s Definition of “Policy Period” Fatal to Insurer’s “Related Claims” Argument

    Congratulations to BWB&O for Ranking #4 in Orange County Business Journal’s 2023 Book of Lists for Law Firms!

    The Condominium Warranty Against Structural Defects in the District of Columbia

    Turner Construction Selected for Anaheim Convention Center Expansion Project

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (04/18/23) – Clean Energy, Critical Infrastructure and Commercial Concerns

    Safety Versus a False Sense of Security: Challenges to the Use of Construction Cranes

    The Double-Breasted Dilemma

    68 Lewis Brisbois Attorneys Recognized in 5th Edition of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America

    Revisiting Statutory Offers to Compromise

    New York Appeals Court Rekindles the Spark

    Substitute Materials — What Are Your Duties? What Are Your Risks? (Law Note)

    Is Your Contract “Mission Essential?” Recovering Costs for Performing During a Force Majeure Event Under Federal Regulations

    Faulty Workmanship Causing Damage to Other Property Covered as Construction Defect

    Builder’s Risk Coverage—Construction Defects
    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. Leveraging 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

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    August 23, 2021 —
    A bill wending its way through the California Legislature could suddenly make a lot more new housing economically feasible. Known as AB 1401, the legislation would abolish local parking requirements for new residential and commercial developments near bus or train stops. It applies to counties with more than 600,000 residents and cities with more than 75,000 people. The bill does not prohibit or restrict parking. It merely deregulates it, allowing developers to decide what works best for a given project. It opens up the possibility, for example, of providing parking in an off-site garage or lot. It permits tandem parking to save space or subsidized shared ride services. It doesn’t prescribe a one-size-fits-all solution to how buildings can best serve the people who use them, and it allows flexibility as transportation options evolve. Most homeowners and tenants want some sort of parking, but local mandates can be extreme — and extremely expensive. Twenty-one California towns even require more than three parking places for a three-bedroom single-family home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Virginia Postrel, Bloomberg

    Delaware Supreme Court Allows Shareholders Access to Corporation’s Attorney-Client Privileged Documents

    August 13, 2014 —
    Delaware corporations may be required to turn over internal documents of directors and officers, including those of in-house counsel, where the factors enumerated in Garner v. Walfinbarger, 430 F.2d 1093 (5th Cir. 1970) weigh in favor of disclosure. In a July 23, 2014 decision of first-impression, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Indiana Electrical Workers Pension Trust Fund IBEW, that the Garner doctrine applies to plenary shareholder/corporation disputes, as well as to books and records inspection actions under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. The Garner doctrine provides that a shareholder may invade the corporation’s attorney-client privilege in order to prove fiduciary breaches by those in control of the corporation upon a showing of good cause. The non-exhaustive list of factors by which a finding of good cause should be tested are: “(i) the number of shareholders and the percentage of stock they represent; (ii) the bona fides of the shareholders; (iii) the nature of the shareholders’ claim and whether it is obviously colorable; (iv) the apparent necessity or desirability of the shareholders having the information and the availability of it from other sources; (v) whether, if the shareholders’ claim is of wrongful action by the corporation, it is of action criminal, or illegal but not criminal, or of doubtful legality; (vi) whether the communication is of advice concerning the litigation itself; (vii) the extent to which the communication is identified versus the extent to which the shareholders are blindly fishing; and (viii) the risk of revelation of trade secrets or other information in whose confidentiality the corporation has an interest for independent reasons.” Reprinted courtesy of Marc S. Casarino, White and Williams LLP and Lori S. Smith, White and Williams LLP Mr. Casarino may be contacted at casarinom@whiteandwilliams.com; Ms. Smith may be contacted at smithl@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Two Years, Too Late: Time-Barred Hurricane Loss is Timely Reminder to Insureds

    November 01, 2021 —
    It happens every year. A clearly covered loss occurs and for one reason or another, the policyholder delays in notifying its insurer of the loss. Usually, the cause for the delay is innocent. It may even appear to be justified, such as where the insured prioritizes steps to save its property, inventory or assist dependent customers. But no matter the reason, insurers can be hard-lined in their refusal to accept an untimely claim. This is especially true in states that presume prejudice to the insurer, or where the insurer need not show prejudice at all. In LMP Holdings, Inc. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., (Case No. 20-24099-CIV) (S.D. Fla.), a twenty‑seven month delay in notifying the insurer of damage from Hurricane Irma proved fatal to the claim. LMP owns a building in Miami, Florida insured under an all-risk commercial property policy issued by Scottsdale. On September 10, 2017, Hurricane Irma struck South Florida and caused extensive damage to LMP’s building, including punctures to the roof and water damage. LMP identified the damage shortly after the storm. Then, in 2018, LMP identified other storm-caused damage, including a water stain on the ceiling. It again identified additional storm damage in 2019. LMP submitted a claim to its insurer on December 10, 2019—about twenty-seven months after it first noticed the damage. Scottsdale agreed to inspect the property but reserved its rights to deny coverage based on late notice. On July 10, 2020, Scottsdale denied coverage for the damage to the property. Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Yaniel Abreu, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Abreu may be contacted at yabreu@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Construction Project is Late—Allocation of Delay

    November 17, 2016 —
    The construction project is late. Very late. The owner is upset and notifies the contractor that it is assessing liquidated damages. The contractor, in turn, claims that the project is late because of excusable, compensable delays and, perhaps, excusable, noncompensable delays. This is a common and unfortunate story between an owner and contractor on any late construction project. Now the fun begins regarding the allocation of the delay! Through previous articles, I discussed that in this scenario the burden really falls on the contractor to establish that the liquidated damages were improperly assessed against it and, thus, it is entitled to additional time and/or extended general conditions as a result of excusable delays. Naturally, this requires the contractor to develop a critical path analysis (time impact analysis) allocating the impacts / delays (and the reasons for the impacts/ delays) to the project completion date. The reason the burden really falls on the contractor is because the owner’s burden is relatively easy – the project was not complete on time pursuant to the contract and any approved changed orders. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Katz, Barron, Squitero, Faust, Friedberg, English & Allen, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@katzbarron.com

    2018 Update to EPA’s “Superfund Task Force Report”

    September 04, 2018 —
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently released its Superfund Task Force Recommendations 2018 Update (the Update). The Superfund Task Force was established by former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to “provide recommendations on an expedited timeframe on how the agency can restructure the cleanup process, realign incentives of all involved parties to promote expeditious remediation, reduce the burden on cooperating parties, incentivize parties to remediate sites, encourage private investment in cleanups of sites and promote the revitalization of properties across the country.” Over the years, thousands of sites have been listed on EPA’s National Priority List (NPL) of Superfund sites, but the process by which listed sites are cleaned up and finally removed from the NPL has been agonizingly slow. The process is governed by the National Contingency Plan rules. The Update states that, as of July 3, 2018, there are 1,346 sites listed on the NPL, and overall, 399 sites have been removed from the NPL. 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

    Drill Rig Accident Kills Engineering Manager, Injures Operator in Philadelphia

    August 10, 2021 —
    Philadelphia officials and engineering firm Langan have confirmed that a company project manager and geotechnical engineer died July 6 in a nighttime drill rig accident while he was on site to inspect foundation work for a pedestrian bridge project. Reprinted courtesy of Stephanie Loder, Engineering News-Record ENR may be contacted at ENR.com@bnpmedia.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on Their Successful Motion for Summary Judgment!

    February 14, 2023 —
    Congratulations to Woodland Hills Partner Patrick Au and Senior Associate Ava Vahdat on their successful Motion for Summary Judgment in Los Angeles Superior Court! BWB&O’s client was a concrete contractor hired by a government entity for a limited sidewalk repair project many years ago. The Plaintiff, who was confined to a wheelchair, filed suit against BWB&O’s client alleging Negligence and Premises Liability after an alleged fall injury on a public sidewalk. Plaintiff’s primary alleged theory of liability against BWB&O’s client was that it either worked on or was supposed to work on that subject sidewalk and in doing so, or failure to do so, caused Plaintiff’s fall and subsequent alleged injuries/damages. Plaintiff claimed in excess of $1 million in damages. After extensive discovery, Mr. Au and Ms. Vahdat gathered enough evidence to prove that BWB&O’s client neither worked on the subject area nor was required to do so. Accordingly, they prepared a successful Motion for Summary Judgment on the basis that no duty was owed to Plaintiff thereby refuting the negligence cause of action. The dispositive motion also proved that the subject sidewalk was not owned, controlled, or maintained by BWB&O’s client thereby negating the premises liability cause of action. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Transportation Officials Make the Best of a Bumpy 2020

    January 18, 2021 —
    The year 2020 provided a bumpy budgetary ride for all modes of transportation, and some industry insiders don’t expect airport and transit ridership to return to pre-pandemic levels for years. Agencies are taking lessons learned, coupled with hopes for the new Biden administration, to carry on as best they can. Reprinted courtesy of Jim Parsons, Engineering News-Record and Aileen Cho, Engineering News-Record Ms. Cho may be contacted at choa@enr.com Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of