BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    housing building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington building code expert witnessSeattle Washington testifying construction expert witnessSeattle Washington defective construction expertSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessSeattle Washington construction scheduling expert witnessSeattle Washington building 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


    What Should Business Owners Do If a Customer Won’t Pay

    OSHA Finalizes PPE Fitting Requirement for Construction Workers

    Construction Contract Basics: No Damages for Delay

    Not Everything is a Pollutant: A Summary of Recent Cases Supporting a Common Sense and Narrow Interpretation of the CGL's Pollution Exclusion

    Attorneys’ Fees and the American Arbitration Association Rule

    Construction Defect Bill Removed from Committee Calendar

    No Coverage for Additional Insured After Completion of Operations

    With No Evidence of COVID-19 Being Present, DC Trial Court Finds No Claim for Business Interruption

    Vacant Property and the Right of Redemption in Pennsylvania

    Contract’s Definition of “Substantial Completion” Does Not Apply to Third Party for Purposes of SOL, Holds Court of Appeal

    AB5 Construction Exemption – A Checklist to Avoid Application of AB5’s Three-Part Test

    How Are You Dealing with Material Delays / Supply Chain Impacts?

    Flawed Welding Faulted in Mexico City Subway Collapse

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

    Wisconsin High Court Rejects Insurer’s Misuse of “Other Insurance” Provision

    Giving Insurance Carrier Prompt Notice of Claim to Avoid “Untimely Notice” Defense

    Insurance for Defective Construction Now in Third Edition

    Here's How Much You Can Make by Renting Out Your Home

    Sun, Sand and Stir-Fry? Miami Woos Chinese for Property: Cities

    HOA Foreclosure Excess Sale Proceeds Go to Owner

    Last Call: Tokyo Iconic Okura Hotel Meets the Wrecking Ball

    University of California Earthquake Report Provides List of Old Concrete Buildings in LA

    Nomos LLP Partner Garret Murai Recognized by Super Lawyers

    Utah Digs Deep and Finds “Design Defect” Includes Pre-Construction Geotechnical Reports

    In Hong Kong, You Can Find a Home Where the Buffalo Roam

    Pinterest Nixes Big San Francisco Lease Deal in Covid Scaleback

    Staten Island Villa Was Home to Nabisco 'Nilla' Wafer Inventor

    Don’t Assume Your Insurance Covers A Newly Acquired Company

    Analysis of the “owned property exclusion” under Panico v. State Farm

    Bremer Whyte’s Newport Beach Team Prevails on a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Wrongful Death Case!

    Ongoing Operations Exclusion Bars Coverage

    Measure of Damages for a Chattel Including Loss of Use

    Exculpatory Provisions in Business Contracts

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Distinguishing Hawaii Law, New Jersey Finds Anti-Assignment Clause Ineffective

    Carwash Prosecutors Seek $1.6 Billion From Brazil Builders

    Homebuilding on the Rise in Nation’s Capitol

    Plaintiffs Not Barred from Proving Causation in Slip and Fall Case, Even With No Witnesses and No Memory of Fall Itself

    Ninth Circuit Clears the Way for Review of Oregon District Court’s Rulings in Controversial Climate Change Case

    Is a Violation of a COVID-19 Order the Basis For Civil Liability?

    Bill would expand multi-year construction and procurement authority in Georgia

    ABC, Via Construction Industry Safety Coalition, Comments on Silica Rule

    Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations in Construction Context

    The Requirement to Post Collateral Under General Agreement of Indemnity Is Real

    Helsinki Stream City: A Re-imagining Outside the System

    Almost Nothing Is Impossible

    California Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Regulate Replacement Cost Estimates

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    Texas res judicata and co-insurer defense costs contribution

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

    PFAS and the Challenge of Cleaning Up “Forever”

    July 31, 2023 —
    From a stream of legal challenges, to ever-expanding regulations on things like cosmetics and drinking water, PFAS are the “forever chemicals” keeping companies and consumers on high alert. While industries scramble to remove the synthetic compounds from products, scientists are researching new techniques for scrubbing PFAS from the environment. There is money to be had for those who can find a more streamlined method of purging the substances—the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has an $800 million contract on the table for the handling, destruction and replacement of PFAS-laden fire-fighting foam—leaving technology companies racing to create solutions. The three main PFAS cleaning techniques currently relied upon can be very effective but are also costly and may leave questionable byproducts in their wake. The established approaches include:
    • Granular Activated Carbon. As one of the most studied treatments for PFAS removal, granular activated carbon is often used in water treatment plants. Large beds of carbon essentially soak up the unwanted chemicals. After the Sweeney Water Plant in North Carolina, whose water source is downstream from a fluorochemical-producing Chemours plant, was found to be contaminated with PFAS, the plant invested around $46 million into upgraded activated carbon systems. Once installed, these systems cost roughly $2.9 million to operate yearly, as the carbon needs to be replaced each time it reaches capacity. Though pricey, the plant says that the process now clears close to 100% of PFAS.
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of PFAS Team, Pillsbury

    Vertical vs. Horizontal Exhaustion – California Supreme Court Issues Ruling Favorable to Policyholders

    May 11, 2020 —
    For years, when faced with damage or injury spanning several policy periods, excess general liability insurers have argued that all potentially applicable underlying policies must be exhausted before the excess drops down to provide coverage (“horizontal exhaustion”). Insureds, on the other hand, insist that they are entitled to immediately access an excess policy for any given policy year, if that year’s underlying policy has exhausted (“vertical exhaustion”). Vertical exhaustion not only enables insureds to directly tap into the excess insurance for which they paid substantial premiums, but also enables the insured to moderate risk given that different lower level policies might (1) be needed for other claims, (2) have larger self-insured retentions, or (3) have other less favorable coverage provisions. Allowing an insured to proceed via vertical exhaustion would also eliminate the heavy administrative and logistical burden that could result from having to pursue and exhaust all underlying coverage on multi-year claims. In Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court, 2020 WL 1671560 (April 6, 2020), the California Supreme Court has come down in favor of policyholders and vertical exhaustion. The Montrose case involved contamination that allegedly occurred between 1947 and 1982 and different liability insurance towers (comprised of primary and excess layers) for each year. The insured, Montrose, maintained a tower of insurance coverage, year by year, and faced claims asserting damage that spanned several decades. Montrose sought coverage from excess insurers under a vertical exhaustion approach. Not surprisingly, Montrose’s excess insurers insisted that horizontal exclusion was required and that Montrose was required to exhausted all other policies with lower attachment points in every single involved policy period. The California Supreme Court ruled in Montrose’s favor, holding that the insured may insist upon full coverage from an excess insurer once the layer directly below it has exhausted. The Court reasoned that the burden of spreading the loss among insurers is one that is appropriately borne by insurers, not insureds. Reprinted courtesy of Alan H. Packer, Newmeyer Dillion and James S. Hultz, Newmeyer Dillion Mr. Packer may be contacted at alan.packer@ndlf.com Mr. Hultz may be contacted at james.hultz@ndlf.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Chicago Aldermen Tell Casino Bidders: This Is a Union Town

    June 13, 2022 —
    Several Chicago aldermen on Monday sent gaming companies that are bidding on building the city’s first casino a message: this is a union town. During a special casino committee of the city council hearing on Monday, the aldermen expressed concerns that the three bidders -- Bally’s Corp., Hard Rock International and Rush Street Gaming -- that are seeking to construct and operate a gaming and entertainment complex don’t have a deal with local labor groups. Chicago Chief Financial Officer Jennie Bennett said during the hearing that a deal with labor was part of the requirements laid out in the city’s request for proposals. None of the three bidders have committed to labor standards, and moving forward without an agreement on items such as a living wage “is a slap in the face,” Robert Reiter Jr., president of the Chicago Federation of Labor, said during the public testimony portion of the meeting. The federation represents 300 affiliated unions and their half a million members. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Shruti Singh, Bloomberg

    CGL Policy May Not Cover Cybersecurity and Data-Related Losses

    March 25, 2024 —
    The construction industry, like many other industries, has experienced an increased reliance on, and implementation of, technology in the past few years. Smart phones and tablets are used on most project sites, computers are an integral part of the planning process, and various software programs are used throughout the construction process. Likewise, much of the machinery and equipment used during construction (e.g., total stations, trucks, tower cranes) is interconnected, and in some cases, operated or monitored remotely.1 With an increase in technology comes a risk of cybersecurity and data-related losses. Many large businesses purchase Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) insurance and assume cybersecurity and data-related losses are covered. Unfortunately, this is generally not the case. CGL policies typically cover three general types of damage: bodily injury, property damage, and advertising injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Susana Arce, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Arce may be contacted at SArce@sdvlaw.com

    Economic Damages Cannot be Based On Speculation

    October 16, 2018 —
    Economic damages, unlike non-economic damages (such as those in personal injury disputes), need to rest on a reasonable basis. Economic damages are those routinely seen in a construction dispute. These damages cannot be based on conjecture or guesswork and need to be supported by competent substantial evidence. Otherwise, the economic damages will be deemed too speculative because they are not reasonably quantifiable. I recently discussed a case involving the professional boxer Canelo Alvarez that was sued by a former promoter for unjust enrichment. Although the promoter recovered a jury verdict for unjust enrichment damages against Canelo Alvarez, the verdict was reversed because the methodology utilized by the promoter to demonstrate damages was speculative. This is definitely not what a plaintiff wants to happen after prevailing at the trial level! Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at dma@kirwinnorris.com

    Building Amid the COVID Challenge

    November 29, 2021 —
    At longtime client Clark Construction, Dave Beck took charge of risk management just weeks before the COVID-19 pandemic struck. David Beck made a big career move last year—just how big, he soon learned. In January 2020, Beck became division president for risk management at Clark Construction Group, a major national builder based in Bethesda, Md., with more than 4,000 employees across the U.S. In business since 1906, Clark has grown from a small, local excavator into one of the country’s best-known providers of construction services. Beck took up his position at Clark shortly before COVID-19 changed life for everyone. We recently reached out to him to learn how his role has evolved since then. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Couple Gets $79,000 on $10 Million Construction Defect Claim

    September 24, 2013 —
    A Florida couple who sought more than $10 million in damages in a construction defect suit, has received a jury verdict of only $79,000. Leo and Kathryn Vecellio bought the 25,000 square-foot home in 2008, after which they discovered water intrusion issues. They sued both the builder and couple from whom they had bought the house. Although the Vecellios spent more than $11 million to repair their home, the jury concluded that the builder did not know about the construction defects. The jury did determine that the builder, Dan E. Swanson, did either lie about or conceal certain facts about the construction. He was ordered to pay the $79,000 in damages to the Vecellios. Lawyers for the defendants argued that the leaks were not from the original construction of the home, but were instead caused by the renovations made by the Vecellios. The Vecellios are pursuing whether they are entitled to money from home warranties. “There will be more evidence to be considered. I’m determined to see this through,” said Leo Vecellio. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    The Courts and Changing Views on Construction Defect Coverage

    October 02, 2013 —
    There have been changes recently in how courts interpret commercial general liability policies. Writing for Claims Journal, Burke Coleman, who is legal counsel and Compliance Manager for Demotech, looks at five recent cases and how they show changing views of CGL policies and construction defect claims. He notes that the Ohio Supreme Court concluded that “defective construction itself does not trigger coverage.” The court’s view in Westfield Ins. Co. v. Custom Agri Systems, Inc. was that a CGL policy does not protect contractors from every risk, but instead covers damage to other property that occur due to its work. But, conversely, the Georgia Supreme Court found that construction defect claims could be covered under a commercial general liability policy, noting that “the limits of coverage do not have to be found in the word ‘occurrence,’ inasmuch as the other words of the insuring agreement — as well as the policy exclusions — have their own roles to play in marking the limits of coverage.” This decision was reached in Taylor Morrison Services v. HDI-Gerling America. The Connecticut Supreme Court also concluded that defective construction could trigger coverage from a CGL policy, however, as Mr. Coleman notes, “only damage to non-defective property may be entitled to coverage.” He concludes that the North Dakota Supreme Court “has taken an even broader approach to the issue.” That court found that construction defects were covered “if the faulty work was unexpected and unintended.” Finally, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia held that faulty work can be property damage. He notes “the policy at issue included a ‘your work’ exclusion that excluded coverage for work performed by the insured, but subcontractors were excepted from the exclusion.” However, another clause excluded work performed on the behalf of the insured. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of