BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    production housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington construction project management expert witnessesSeattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington construction forensic expert witnessSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington concrete expert witnessSeattle Washington stucco 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


    Construction Defects and Second Buyers in Pennsylvania

    Revisiting Termination For Convenience Clauses In Uncertain And Ever-Changing Economic Times

    Dispute Over Exhaustion of Primary Policy

    Pennsylvania Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Attorney Fee Award Under the Contractor and Subcontractor Payment Act

    House Committee Kills Colorado's 2015 Attainable Housing Bill

    Renee Zellweger Selling Connecticut Country Home

    Facts about Chinese Drywall in Construction

    Florida Condo Collapse Victims Reach $1 Billion Settlement

    Safe and Safer

    Negligence Claim Not Barred by Gist of the Action Doctrine

    Construction Contract Terms Matter. Be Careful When You Draft Them.

    Contractors: Consult Your Insurance Broker Regarding Your CGL Policy

    More on the VCPA and Construction

    Critical Materials for the Energy Transition: Of “Rare Earths” and Even Rarer Minerals

    The Ghosts of Baha Mar: How a $3.5 Billion Paradise Went Bust

    Insurer Must Defend Additional Insured Though Its Insured is a Non-Party

    Prison Contractors Did Not Follow the Law

    Is Construction Defect Notice under Florida Repair Statute a Suit?

    Coverage for Construction Defects Barred by Business Risk Exclusions

    EEOC Builds on Best Practice Guidance Regarding Harassment Within the Construction Industry

    Home Prices in 20 U.S. Cities Rose in June at a Slower Pace

    Texas Jury Awards $5.3 Million to Company Defamed by Union: Could it work in Pennsylvania?

    Indemnification Against Release/“Disposal” of Hazardous Materials

    With Vice President's Tie-Breaker, US Senate Approves Far-Reaching Climate Bill

    “Based On”… What Exactly? NJ Appellate Division Examines Phrase and Estops Insurer From Disclaiming Coverage for 20-Month Delay

    Jason Poore Receives 2018 Joseph H. Foster Young Lawyer Award

    New Law Raises Standard for Defense Experts as to Medical Causation

    More Musings From the Mediation Trenches

    Tightest Credit Market in 16 Years Rejects Bernanke’s Bid

    Antitrust Walker Process Claims Not Covered Under Personal Injury Coverage for Malicious Prosecution

    Mississippi Sues Over Public Health Lab Defects

    Locals Concerns over Taylor Swift’s Seawall Misdirected

    Second Circuit Brings Clarity To Scope of “Joint Employer” Theory in Discrimination Cases

    Practical Pointers for Change Orders on Commercial Construction Contracts

    Construction Costs Up

    Coverage Denied for Condominium Managing Agent

    Coverage For Advertising Injury Barred by Prior Publication Exclusion

    Insured's Complaint for Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Adequately Pleads Consequential Damages

    Texas Legislature Puts a Spear in Doctrine Making Contractor Warrantor of Owner Furnished Plans and Specifications

    The Importance of the Subcontractor Exception to the “Your Work” Exclusion

    Appraisal Ordered After Carrier Finds Loss Even if Cause Disputed

    New York Supreme Court Building Opening Delayed Again

    The Enforceability of “Pay-If-Paid” Provisions Affirmed in New Jersey

    Federal Court Holds That Other Insurance Analysis Is Unnecessary If Policies Cover Different Risks

    CSLB Reminds California Public Works Contractors to Renew Their Public Works Registration

    Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Owes Duty to Defend Latent Condition Claim That Caused Fire Damage to Property Years After Construction Work

    Mediation Confidentiality Bars Malpractice Claim but for How Long?

    COVID-19 and Mutual Responsibility Clauses

    Carroll Brock of Larchmont Homes Dies at Age 88

    The End of Eroding Limits Policies in Nevada is Just the Beginning
    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

    When Subcontractors Sue Only the Surety on Payment Bond and Tips for General Contractors

    August 13, 2019 —
    Payment bonds have been a staple of public construction projects since 1874, when the U.S. Congress first passed the Heard Act, which required that contractors obtain payment bonds for public projects to ensure that subcontractors and material suppliers have a way to recover their damages if an upstream contractor fails to pay for work performed and materials furnished on the project. The 1874 Heard Act has since been replaced by the 1935 Miller Act, and the concept has been expanded to construction projects funded by the states through state statutes known as “Little Miller Acts.” But the structure remains the same: On most public projects where the project’s cost exceeds $100,000, the prime contractor (the bond principal) is required to obtain a payment bond from a surety equal to the contract price to guarantee to subcontractors and material suppliers (the bond obligees) that the surety will pay for labor and materials under certain statutory or contractual conditions should the contractor fail to make payment. A surety is jointly and severally liable with the contractor to the subcontractor, which means that the subcontractor may seek recovery against either the contractor or the surety or both, and the contractor and surety will be liable for the damages together. Put another way, in most states and in federal court, an unpaid subcontractor has the right to sue only the surety on the payment bond without joining the contractor because a contract of suretyship is a direct liability of the surety to the subcontractor.1 When the contractor fails to perform, the surety becomes directly responsible at once — it is unnecessary for the subcontractor to establish that the contractor failed to carry out its contract before the obligation of the surety becomes absolute. Reprinted courtesy of Ira M. Schulman, Pepper Hamilton LLP and Emily D. Anderson, Pepper Hamilton LLP Mr. Schulman may be contacted at schulmani@pepperlaw.com Ms. Anderson may be contacted at andersone@pepperlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Duty to Design and Maintain Reasonably Safe Roadways Extends to All Persons. (WA)

    February 25, 2014 —
    Case: Lowman v. Wilbur, et al., 178 Wn.2d 165, 309 P.3d 3.87 (2013). Issue: If a passenger’s injuries are in fact caused by the placement of a utility pole too close to a roadway, can the injuries be deemed too remote for purposes of legal causation? NO. Facts: Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle that lost control and collided with a utility pole that was 4.47 feet from the edge of the roadway. The vehicle’s driver was under the influence of alcohol. Plaintiff sued the driver as well as the utility company and Skagit County for negligence. The trial court granted the utility company and Skagit County’s summary judgment motion, finding that the negligent placement of the utility pole was not a legal cause of plaintiff’s injuries. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether a negligently placed utility pole could be the legal cause of a resulting injury. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Natasha Khachatourians, Scheer & Zehnder LLP
    Ms. Khachatourians may be contacted at natashak@scheerlaw.com

    Brown and Caldwell Appoints Stigers as Design Chief Engineer

    December 13, 2022 —
    WALNUT CREEK, Calif., Dec. 06, 2022 — Brown and Caldwell today announces Vice President Tracy Stigers has been appointed as design chief engineer in recognition of four decades of exceptional technical leadership and client service. She is the first woman in the firm's 75-year history to hold the esteemed title. Stigers will lead all design from a technical and delivery expertise perspective across all of Brown and Caldwell's design initiatives, implementing innovation, quality control, and project delivery throughout North America and the Pacific. Since joining the leading environmental engineering and construction services firm in 1980, Stigers has progressed from junior engineer to one of its top technical and delivery experts. She has vast experience in the design and construction of large-scale wastewater conveyance, treatment, and reuse facilities, including serving as project manager on the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's $2.3 billion Biosolids Digester Facilities Project, the largest value design job in Brown and Caldwell's history. Early in her career, Stigers worked alongside and was mentored by company co-founder Dave Caldwell, helping shape its tradition of solving the most challenging water and environmental challenges. Her dedication to upholding Brown and Caldwell's reputation for project excellence and innovation was commended by CEO Rich D'Amato: "Tracy is the epitome of quality, commitment, and technical prowess," he said. "Her leadership, knowledge, and legacy of delivering solutions to clients perfectly embody our heritage and is a shining example for tomorrow's aspiring engineering leaders." Throughout her career, Stigers has held numerous leadership roles at industry organizations, including sitting on the board of trustees for the Water Environment Federation and the California Water Environment Association. She is a current member of the Clarkson University Engineering Advisory Council. About Brown and Caldwell Headquartered in Walnut Creek, California, Brown and Caldwell is a full-service environmental engineering and construction services firm with 52 offices and 1,800 professionals across North America and the Pacific. For 75 years, our creative solutions have helped municipalities, private industry, and government agencies successfully overcome their most challenging water and environmental obstacles. As an employee-owned company, Brown and Caldwell is passionate about exceeding our clients' expectations and making a difference for our employees, our communities, and our environment. For more information, visit www.brownandcaldwell.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Stacking of Service Interruption and Contingent Business Interruption Coverages Permitted

    December 10, 2015 —
    The court found that stacking of interruption coverages was allowed based up the language of the policy. Lion Oil Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148261 (W.D. Ark. Nov. 2, 2015). The insured's oil line was ruptured, causing an interruption of crude oil delivery service. The insured held policies issued by National Union. The policies included multiple time element extensions. One extension related to Service Interruption which promised to insure against loss for:
    Service Interruption: electrical, steam, gas, water, sewer, incoming or outgoing voice, data, or video, or an other utility or service transmission lines and related plants, substations and equipment situated on or outside of the premises.
    Both parties agreed that the service interruption provision was unambiguous and that the court should give effect to the plain language of the policy. 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

    Alabama Federal Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Construction Defect Declaratory Judgment Action Due to Expanded Duty to Defend Standard

    May 31, 2021 —
    While the starting point for assessing an insurer’s duty to defend requires comparing the allegations contained within a complaint to the language contained within the insured’s policy, the majority of states require an insurer to do more. In Alabama, a failure of the underlying complaint to allege damages falling within the policy’s terms is not necessarily fatal to coverage – if there are facts provable by admissible evidence to place the loss within coverage. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama recently examined Alabama’s broadened duty to defend standard in Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance Company v. Gates Builders, No. 20-00596, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83645 (S.D. Ala. Apr. 29, 2021). In Frankenmuth, the magistrate judge was tasked with determining whether the court should abstain from hearing an insurer’s declaratory judgment coverage action pending the resolution of the underlying state court action. The underlying state court action arose out of an allegedly defective construction project. Frankenmuth’s insured, Gates Builders, was hired to perform exterior and structural rehabilitation work at the Resort Conference Center Condominium (the Condominium) in Gulf Shores, Alabama. The project began in July 2014 and concluded in June 2015. In 2019, Gates Builders was informed that the Condominium’s decks were sagging. Gates Builders shored up the decks and provided the Condominium with a quote for the cost of repairs. In July 2020, the Condominium’s Association filed suit, alleging that the work performed in 2014 and 2015 was faulty and had caused damage to the Condominium. Reprinted courtesy of Anthony L. Miscioscia, White and Williams and Margo Meta, White and Williams Mr. Miscioscia may be contacted at misciosciaa@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Meta may be contacted at metam@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    SunTrust Will Pay $968 Million to Resolve Mortgage Probes

    June 18, 2014 —
    SunTrust Banks Inc. (STI) agreed to pay $968 million to resolve federal and state claims that a unit misrepresented the quality of mortgages the bank originated and deceived homeowners on loans it serviced. The agreement covers loans SunTrust Mortgage made from January 2006 through March 2012 that were backed by the Federal Housing Administration even though they didn’t meet agency requirements, the Justice Department said in a statement today. Atlanta-based SunTrust disclosed the agreement in an October regulatory filing and has already accounted for the payment. “SunTrust’s conduct is a prime example of the widespread underwriting failures that helped bring about the financial crisis,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. “We will continue to hold accountable financial institutions that, in the pursuit of their own financial interests, misuse public funds and cause harm to hardworking Americans.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Schoenberg, Bloomberg
    Mr. Schoenberg may be contacted at tschoenberg@bloomberg.net

    Seattle Independent Contractor Ordinance – Pitfalls for Unwary Construction Professionals

    October 09, 2023 —
    Chapter 14.34 of the Seattle Municipal Code is a relatively new ordinance that can affect the parties to a construction contract for work performed within the City of Seattle’s city limits. The Independent Contractor Protection Ordinance (“ICPO”) was enacted to provide self-employed persons, or entities composed of not more than one person, regardless of corporate form, recourse for timely payment for work performed. The ICPO applies to contracts of $600[i] or more between an independent contractor and a hiring entity where the work, in whole or in part, is known to be performed within the City of Seattle’s city limits.[ii] The ICPO cannot be waived by parties to a contract.[iii] Historically, the primary legal recourse for non-payment or late payment for work performed under a contract involves an expensive breach of contract action, and one reason the ICPO was enacted was to give greater protection to a growing number of Washington independent contractors who report problems with timely and accurate payment. The ICPO affects “hiring entities” or any individual, partnership, association, corporation, business trust, or any entity, person or group of persons, or a successor thereof, that hires independent contractors to provide services within the scope of a hiring entity’s business or commercial activities. In the construction context, most general contractors, subcontractors, design professionals, and design consultants should be aware of this ordinance, as well as certain owners[iv] and development-side entities. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Travis Colburn, Ahlers Cressman & Sleight
    Mr. Colburn may be contacted at travis.colburn@acslawyers.com

    Contract Change # 10: Differing Site Conditions (law note)

    March 28, 2018 —
    Previously, the A201 required a Contractor to provide notice to the Owner and Architect within 21 days after discovery of unforeseen site conditions. This notification is required prior to the conditions being disturbed, so as to allow the Design Team the ability to evaluate the site and determine the compensability of any such differing conditions. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Melissa Dewey Brumback, Construction Law in North Carolina