BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction expert witness public projectsSeattle Washington civil engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington ada design expert witnessSeattle Washington construction project management expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness commercial buildings
    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


    A Deep Dive Into an Undervalued Urban Marvel

    Sanctions Award Against Pro Se Plaintiff Upheld

    California’s Fifth Appellate District Declares the “Right to Repair Act” the Exclusive Remedy for Construction Defect Claims

    Design & Construction Case Expands Florida’s Slavin Doctrine

    What You Need to Know to Protect the Project Against Defect Claims

    Evaluating Construction Trends From 2023 and Forecasting For 2024

    Don’t Be Lazy with Your Tenders

    Anchorage Building Codes Credited for Limited Damage After Quakes

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Receives “Tier 1” Ranking by U.S. News and World Reports

    Search in Florida Collapse to Take Weeks; Deaths Reach 90

    Amazon Feels the Heat From Hoverboard Fire Claims

    When Licensing Lapses: How One Contractor Lost a $1 Million Dispute

    CDJ’s #2 Topic of the Year: Ewing Constr. Co., Inc. v. Amerisure Ins. Co., 2014 Tex. LEXIS 39 (Tex. Jan.17, 2014)

    Architect, Engineer, and Design Professional Liens in California: A Different Animal than the Mechanics’ Lien

    Atlantic City Faces Downward Spiral With Revel’s Demise

    Portions of Policyholder's Expert's Opinions Excluded

    Patagonia Will Start Paying for Homeowners' Solar Panels

    Colorado Construction-Defects Reform Law Attempt Expected in 2015

    The ‘Sole Option’ Arbitration Provision in Construction Contracts

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    New Jersey Supreme Court Holding Impacts Allocation of Damages in Cases Involving Successive Tortfeasors

    Negligence Per Se Claim Based Upon Failure to Pay Benefits Fails

    How Your Disgruntled Client Can Turn Into Your Very Own Car Crash! (and How to Avoid It) (Law Tips)

    Despite Construction Gains, Cement Maker Sees Loss

    Collaborating or Competing with Construction Tech Startups

    NYC’s Next Hot Neighborhoods Targeted With Property Funds

    Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences as Affirmative Defense

    No Damage for Delay? No Problem: Exceptions to the Enforceability of No Damage for Delay Clauses

    Housing Starts in U.S. Little Changed From Stronger January

    In a Win for Design Professionals, California Court of Appeals Holds That Relation-Back Doctrine Does Not Apply to Certificate of Merit Law

    Environmental Suit Against Lockheed Martin Dismissed

    Rich NYC Suburbs Fight Housing Plan They Say Will ‘Destroy’ Them

    Sensors for Smarter Construction – Interview with Laura Kassovic of MbientLab

    Notice of Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Deadline

    Death, Taxes and Attorneys’ Fees in Construction Disputes

    Policyholders' Coverage Checklist in Times of Coronavirus

    Meet the Forum's ADR Neutrals: TOM NOCAR

    'Right to Repair' and Fixing Equipment in a Digital Age

    Courts Will Not Second-Guess Public Entities When it Comes to Design Immunity

    Retired Judge Claims Asbestos in Courthouse gave him Cancer

    Waiver of Subrogation and Lack of Contractual Privity Bars Commercial Tenants’ Claims

    New York Court Grants Insured's Motion to Dismiss Construction Defect Case and Awards Fees to Insured

    Congratulations to all of our 2023 Attorneys Named as Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

    Is It Time to Digitize Safety?

    New York Court Rejects Owner’s Bid for Additional Insured Coverage

    No Coverage for Subcontractor's Faulty Workmanship

    Important Insurance Alert for Out-of-State Contractors Assisting in Florida Recovery Efforts!

    Hotel Owner Makes Construction Defect Claim

    Commencing of the Statute of Repose for Construction Defects

    Suing A Payment Bond Surety in Different Venue Than Set Forth in The Subcontract
    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

    Economic Loss Not Property Damage

    November 04, 2019 —
    The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court that the insured subcontractor's economic losses did not amount to covered property damage. Greenwich Ins. Co. v. Capsco Industries, Inc., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 23949 (5th Cir. Aug 12, 2019). Capsco Industries, Inc. was a subcontractor on the construction of a casino. Capsco subcontracted with Ground Control to install water, sewage, and storm-drain lines. Ground Control was terminated from the project by the general contractor for alleged safety violations and failed drug tests of its employees. Ground Control sued in state court against multiple parties, including Capsco, seeking payment for work on the project. The claims were dismissed on summary judgment because neither party had obtained the required certificates of responsibility from the state, making the parties' contract void. The Mississippi Supreme Court agreed the contract was void, but reversed and remanded for further proceedings based solely on theories of unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. While the state case was on remand, Capsco's liability insurers, Greenwich Insurance Company and Indian Harbor Insurance Company, filed a compliant for declaratory judgment in federal district court seeking a declaration that they did not owe a defense or indemnity to Capsco. The defendants were Ground Control, Capsco, the general contractor, and the casino owner. The latter two parties were dismissed. Ground Control counterclaimed for coverage of its claims against Capsco. The district court stayed proceedings until the state court litigation ended. 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

    Attorneys’ Fees Are Available in Arizona Eviction Actions

    December 19, 2018 —
    The Arizona Court of Appeals recently held that any successful plaintiff in a forcible detainer action (i.e., an eviction action) may recover an award of its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred at trial under A.R.S. § 12-1178(A). See Bank of New York v. Dodev, 1 CA-CV 17-0652 (Ct. App. Nov. 20, 2018). Prior to this decision, caselaw held that fees were only awardable in actions arising out of the termination of a residential lease. RREEF Mgmt. Co. v. Camex Prods., Inc., 190 Ariz. 75, 945 P.2d 386 (Ct. App. 1997). Changes to the statute, however, rendered the prior caselaw obsolete. Although the holding in Dodev is important, the facts of the case are truly astonishing…and somewhat depressing. The Facts In Dodev, Ivaylo Dodev (Dodev) defaulted on his home loan in 2008. He nevertheless “succeeded in remaining on the [p]roperty by filing numerous legal actions that delayed the foreclosure and subsequent trustee’s sale” at least through the date of the opinion—a ten (10) year period. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Ben Reeves, Snell & Wilmer
    Mr. Reeves may be contacted at breeves@swlaw.com

    Hail Drives Construction Spending in Amarillo

    October 25, 2013 —
    Amarillo had a hailstorm in May and it’s still having an effect on the construction industry there. Prior to the May 28 hailstorm, the city issued 223 permits for roofing projects, worth a total of $1.9 million. But in the four months after the hailstorm, the city issued 13,696 roofing permits worth about $151.4. During the same nine months of 2012, the total was only $6.9 million. The Amarillo Globe-News reports that there has been a slowing of residential roof work, but the commercial roofing is still going strong. Scott McDonald, an Amarillo building official told the paper that a commercial roof can exceed a million dollars. “The commercial aspect is much more complicated, and we’re just now getting started,” said Mr. McDonald. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up (10/06/21)

    October 18, 2021 —
    Real estate tokenization and smart home technology continue to grow, negotiations surrounding the bipartisan infrastructure bill stall its passing, artificial intelligence is poised to transform the construction industry, and more.
    • Contra Global leverages real estate tokenization, the process of creating tokens on the Blockchain and assigning them to real estate properties that already exist or are under construction, to remove traditionally high barriers to investment entry as well as intermediary fees in the industry. (Navid Ladani, Yahoo Finance)
    • Following the 2-week closure of the construction industry after protests turned violent over vaccine mandates, the Victorian government announced its reopening with up to 25 percent capacity of workers and new vaccination rules. (ABC News)
    • Though the construction industry has traditionally relied heavily on human experience and expertise to complete projects, the industry is rapidly adopting digital solutions to adapt to chronic labor shortages, the need for sustainable solutions, and supply-chain disruptions. (Tom Taulli, Forbes)
    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Pillsbury's Construction & Real Estate Law Team

    Client Alert: Service Via Tag Jurisdiction Insufficient to Subject Corporation to General Personal Jurisdiction

    August 27, 2014 —
    In Martinez v. Aero Caribbean (No. 3:11-cv-03194-WHA, filed 8/21/2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held service of process on a corporation's officer, within the forum state, does not establish general personal jurisdiction over the corporation unless the corporation's contacts with the forum render it essentially at home in the state. Decedent, Lorenzo Corazon Mendoza, was traveling by airplane when the plane crashed, killing everyone aboard. Defendant Avions De Transport Régional (ATR) manufactured the airplane that crashed. Plaintiffs Lorenzo Martinez, Eliezer Martinez, Eliu Mendoza and Gloria Montes (Plaintiffs) filed suit against ATR as heirs of decedent. ATR is a business entity organized under French law with its principal place of business in France. It is not licensed to do business in California, and it has no office or other physical presence there. It has purchased parts from California suppliers, sent representatives to California to promote its business, and advertised in trade publications available in California. It has also sold airplanes to a California corporation. Empire Airlines flies from Santa Barbara to Ontario using ATR planes on a regular basis; however, Empire Airlines purchased the ATR planes secondhand from third parties, and never directly from ATR. At the time of the crash, ATR North America (a wholly owned subsidiary of ATR) had its headquarters in Virginia, and has since relocated to Florida. Reprinted courtesy of R. Bryan Martin, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP and Kristian B. Moriarty, Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP Mr. Martin may be contacted at bmartin@hbblaw.com; Mr. Moriarty may be contacted at kmoriarty@hbblaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Hundreds of Coronavirus Coverage Cases Await Determination on Consolidation

    September 21, 2020 —
    On July 30, 2020, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (JPML) heard oral argument on the potential consolidation of all federal cases involving business interruption coverage relating to coronavirus and shut-down orders. A decision will be rendered in the near future. Meanwhile, many cases are on hold, waiting for a determination on consolidation. One such case is Pigment Inc. v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133230 (S.D. Cal. July 27, 2020), where the court granted a stay pending a decision by the JPML. The case is a class action based on denial of coverage under business interruption insurance. Plaintiff's case alleged a bad faith denial that risked the permanent closure of its business due to unexpected temporary shutdowns from the COVID-19 pandemic. Plaintiff sought a stay pending the decision of the JPML. The court considered the possible damage which could result from granting a stay, the hardship which a party could suffer in being required to go forward, and the orderly course of justice measured by the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay. 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

    Idaho Supreme Court Address Water Exclusion in Commercial Property Exclusion

    March 09, 2020 —
    In ABK, LLC v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 2019 WL 7046393 (Idaho Dec. 23, 2019) an insured gas station owner sued its property insurance carrier for breach of contract and bad faith after the carrier denied coverage for loss caused by water contamination of the insured’s underground storage tanks. Mid-Century had denied coverage because the underground storage tanks were damaged by water -- which was an excluded peril under the policy. Mid-Century issued Business Owners Special Property Coverage to the insured which provided all-risk coverage for physical loss or damage. The policy contained a number of exclusionary provisions including a water exclusion which provided that the policy did not pay for loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by:
    1. Flood, surface water, waves, tides, tidal waves, overflow or any body of water, or their spray, all whether driven by wind or not; ...
    2. Water under the ground surface pressing on, or flowing or seeping through:
      • Foundations, walls, floors or paved surfaces:
      • Basements, whether paved or not; or
      • Doors, windows or other openings.
    In upholding the District Court’s ruling in favor of Mid-Century, the Idaho Supreme Court held that a clear reading of the unambiguous policy provides damage caused by surface water or water under the ground when flowing or seeping through other openings is excluded from coverage. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of James M. Eastham, Traub Lieberman
    Mr. Eastham may be contacted at jeastham@tlsslaw.com

    Delaware Supreme Court Choice of Law Ruling Vacates a $13.7 Million Verdict Against Travelers

    August 07, 2018 —
    On July 16, 2018, the Delaware Supreme Court held in Travelers Indemnity Company v. CNH Industrial America, LLC, No. 420, 2017 (Del. Jul. 16, 2018), that a court’s choice of law inquiry in an insurance coverage dispute should focus on the contacts most relevant to the insurance contract rather than the location of the underlying claims. In Travelers, CNH Industrial America, LLC (CNH), sought coverage for asbestos liabilities associated with J.I. Case, Inc., a subsidiary it had acquired, under policies issued to J.I. Case and its former parent company, Tenneco, Inc. The issue before the Delaware Supreme Court was whether the anti-assignment clause in three Travelers policies issued to Tenneco, Inc. precluded the assignment of the policies to CNH. The validity of the assignment turned on which state’s law governed the dispute. (Under Wisconsin law, the parties agreed that the assignment was valid, while under Texas law, the parties agreed the assignment was invalid.) Reprinted courtesy of Gregory Capps, White and Williams LLP and Zachery Roth, White and Williams LLP Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com Mr. Roth may be contacted at rothz@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of