BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington defective construction expertSeattle Washington forensic architectSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington construction expert witnessesSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington fenestration 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


    Quick Note: Independent Third-Party Spoliation Of Evidence Claim

    Know Your Obligations Under Both the Prime Contract and Subcontract

    School Board Sues Multiple Firms over Site Excavation Problem

    White and Williams Earns Tier 1 Rankings from U.S. News "Best Law Firms" 2020

    Colorado Passes Compromise Bill on Construction Defects

    What is a “Force Majeure” Clause? Do I Need one in my Contract? Three Options For Contractors, Subcontractors and Suppliers to Consider

    Project Completion Determines Mechanics Lien Recording Deadline

    Delaware Strengthens Jurisdictional Defenses for Foreign Corporations Registered to Do Business in Delaware

    Chambers USA Names Peckar & Abramson to Band 1 Level in Construction Law; 29 P&A Lawyers Recognized as Leading Attorneys; Six Regions and Government Contracts Practice Recognized

    Real Estate & Construction News Round-Up 04/06/22

    COVID-19 Case Remanded for Failure to Meet Amount in Controversy

    Dispute between City and Construction Company Over Unsightly Arches

    Contractors and Force Majeure: Contractual Protection from Hurricanes and Severe Weather

    Georgia Super Lawyers Recognized Two Lawyers from Hunton’s Insurance Recovery Group

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

    Court Finds That Limitation on Conditional Use Permit Results in Covered Property Damage Due to Loss of Use

    Changes to Judicial Selection in Mexico Create a New Case for Contractual ADR Provisions

    The Goldilocks Rule: Panel Rejects Proposed Insurer-Specific MDL Proceedings for Four Large Insurers, but Establishes MDL Proceeding for the Smallest

    Unpredictable Opinion Regarding Construction Lien (Reinstatement??)

    Lewis Brisbois Listed as Top 10 Firm of 2022 on Leopard Solutions Law Firm Index

    How I Prevailed on a Remote Jury Trial

    Too Costly to Be Fair: Texas Appellate Court Finds the Arbitration Clause in a Residential Construction Contract Unenforceable

    UPDATE: Texas Federal Court Permanently Enjoins U.S. Department of Labor “Persuader Rule” Requiring Law Firms and Other Consultants to Disclose Work Performed for Employers on Union Organization Efforts

    M&A Representation and Warranty Insurance Considerations in the Wake of the Coronavirus Pandemic

    Lewis Brisbois Launches New Practice Focusing on Supply Chain Issues

    Contract, Breach of Contract, and Material Breach of Contract

    Know Whether Your Course of Business Operations Are Covered Or Excluded By Your Insurance

    Insurer's Appeal of Jury Verdict Rejected by Tenth Circuit

    More Musings on Why I Mediate

    Real Estate & Construction News Roundup (7/2/24) – Increase in Commercial Property Vacancy Rates, Trouble for the Real Estate Market and Real Estate as a Long-Term Investment

    Can I Be Required to Mediate, Arbitrate or Litigate a California Construction Dispute in Some Other State?

    Statutory Time Limits for Construction Defects in Massachusetts

    Summary Judgment in Favor of General Contractor Under Privette Doctrine Overturned: Lessons Learned

    Reversing Itself, West Virginia Supreme Court Holds Construction Defects Are Covered

    South Carolina “occurrence” and allocation

    Philadelphia Enacts Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) Program

    Insurer Must Defend Contractor Against Claims of Faulty Workmanship

    Saved By The Statute: The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Claims Under Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Want to Use Drones in Your Construction Project? FAA Has Just Made It Easier.

    Reminder: Always Order a Title Search for Your Mechanic’s Lien

    Editorial: Qatar Is Champion of Safety Hypocrisy in Migrant Worker Deaths

    Zell Says Homeownership Rate to Fall as Marriages Delayed

    Prefabrication Contract Considerations

    “You’re Out of Here!” -- CERCLA (Superfund) Federal Preemption of State Environmental Claims in State Courts

    Supply Chain Delay Recommendations

    Architect Responds to Defect Lawsuit over Defects at Texas Courthouse

    The Fifth Circuit, Applying Texas Law, Strikes Down Auto Exclusion

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    Cost of Materials Holding Back Housing Industry
    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. Drawing 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

    Second Circuit Court Differentiates the Standard for Determining Evident Partiality for a Neutral Arbitrator and a Party-Appointed Arbitrator

    August 07, 2018 —
    On June 7, 2018, the Second Circuit Court in Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyds of London v. Fla., Dep’t of Fin. Servs.,1 held that a party-appointed arbitrator should not be held to the same standard as a neutral arbitrator. The Court vacated a district court’s order vacating an arbitral award in a reinsurance dispute between Insurance Company of Americas (“ICA”) and Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyds of London (“Underwriters”). The case was one of first impression for the Second Circuit on how to determine the standard of evident partiality challenged to a party-appointed arbitrator. Underwriters reinsured ICA under a series of treaties. The treaties each contained an arbitration clause requiring that disputes be adjudicated by an arbitration panel consisting of three members: one party-appointed arbitrator for each party, and a neutral. The clause required only that the arbitrators “be active or retired disinterested executive officers of insurance or reinsurance companies or Lloyd’s London Underwriters.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Celia B. Waters, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Waters may be contacted at cbw@sdvlaw.com

    Is Performance Bond Liable for Delay Damages?

    October 20, 2016 —
    There is an argument that a performance bond is not liable for delay damages UNLESS the bond specifically allows for the recovery of such damages. Keep this in mind when requiring a performance bond so that the bond covers the associated risks (and damages) you contemplate when requiring the bond. This argument is supported by the Florida Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in American Home Assur. Co. v. Larkin General Hosp., Ltd., 593 So.2d 195, 198 (Fla. 1992):
    The language in the performance bond, construed together with the purpose of the bond, clearly explains that the performance bond merely guaranteed the completion of the construction contract and nothing more. Upon default, the terms of the performance bond required American [performance bond surety] to step in and either complete construction or pay Larkin [obligee] the reasonable costs of completion. Because the terms of the performance bond control the liability of the surety, American’s liability will not be extended beyond the terms of the performance bond. Therefore, American cannot be held liable for delay damages.
    However, the Eleventh Circuit in National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Fortune Const. Co., 320 F.3d 1260(11th Cir. 2003), also analyzing an issue relating to the recoverability of delay-type damages against a performance bond, did not narrowly interpret the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Larkin General Hospital. 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

    Recovery Crews Swing Into Action as Hurricane Michael Departs

    October 23, 2018 —
    By the time the blustery remnants Hurricane Michael departed the East Coast around mid day on Oct. 12, with one last lashing of eastern regions from Virginia to New York, the trail of woe stretched from the Florida Panhandle through the southeastern states and well up the Eastern Seaboard. Authorities report the death toll stood at 16, with victims in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia. Reprinted courtesy of ENR reporters Tom Sawyer, Luke Abaffy, Thomas F. Armistead and Jim Parsons Mr. Sawyer may be contacted at sawyert@enr.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Six Reasons to Use Regular UAV Surveys on Every Construction Project

    October 14, 2019 —
    UAVs are the future of the construction industry. From accurate 3D modeling simulations to regular safety and maintenance checks, UAVs can improve construction projects in many ways—and the value and applications for UAVs is consistently growing. Drones are agile, cost-effective and safe. Here are some reasons why UAV surveys should be part of any construction project. 1. UAV scans are much faster than human inspections Drones can cover large territory much faster than human inspectors can. They can also be used over more difficult terrain, and they can survey areas that are otherwise inaccessible. A drone survey can be completed in a day; not only does this mean that the territory is well-surveyed each time, but it also means surveys can be done more frequently. Construction projects need to be inspected regularly and on time if the project is to meet its deadlines. Delayed construction projects can cost a company millions of dollars, as construction projects need to be completed stage by stage, usually on a strict timeline. Drones will improve the consistency of the project and, in turn, this will improve the reputation of the company itself. Reprinted courtesy of Dustin Price, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Failure to Meet Code Case Remanded to Lower Court for Attorney Fees

    May 24, 2011 —

    Judge Patricia J. Cottrell, ruling on the case Roger Wilkes, et al. v. Shaw Enterprises, LLC, in the Tennessee Court of Appeals, upheld the trial court’s conclusion that “the builder constructed the house in accordance with good building practices even though it was not in strict conformance with the building code.” However, Judge Cottrell directed the lower court to “award to Appellants reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in their first appeal, as determined by the trial court.”

    Judge Cottrell cited in her opinion the contract which specified that the house would be constructed “in accordance with good building practices.” However, after the Wilkes discovered water leakage, the inspections revealed that “that Shaw had not installed through-wall flashing and weep holes when the house was built.” The trial court concluded that:

    “Separate and apart from the flashing and weep holes, the trial court concluded the Wilkeses were entitled to recover damages for the other defects they proved based on the cost of repair estimates introduced during the first and second trials, which the court adjusted for credibility reasons. Thus, the trial court recalculated the amount the Wilkeses were entitled to recover and concluded they were entitled to $17,721 for the value of repairs for defects in violation of good business practices, and an additional 15%, or $2,658.15, for management, overhead, and profit of a licensed contractor. This resulted in a judgment in the amount of $20,370.15. The trial court awarded the Wilkeses attorneys” fees through the Page 9 first trial in the amount of $5,094.78 and discretionary costs in the amount of $1,500. The total judgment following the second trial totaled $26,973.93.”

    In this second appeal, Judge Cottrell concluded, that “the trial court thus did not have the authority to decide the Wilkeses were not entitled to their attorneys” fees and costs incurred in the first appeal.”

    Read the court’s decision

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

    The Economic Loss Rule: From Where Does the Duty Arise?

    January 24, 2022 —
    When entering a contract under Colorado law or attempting to enforce your rights when the other party breaches a contract, it is important to know and understand what rights you have and what claims you can bring or defenses you may have. One important consideration is Colorado’s version of the economic loss rule. The Colorado Supreme Court has issued several opinions clarifying the scope of the economic loss rule since it adopted the rule in 2000. The purpose of the economic loss rule is to maintain the boundary between contract law and tort law. In Colorado, the economic loss rule provides that a party suffering only economic loss from the breach of an express or implied contractual duty may not assert a tort claim for the breach without an independent duty of care under tort law. In most instances the economic loss rule will not bar intentional tort claims. The question becomes: from where does the duty arise? Is there an independent duty in tort law? Did the duty arise solely from the contract? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Taylor Hite, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Ms. Hite may be contacted at Hite@hhmrlaw.com

    Jury Awards 20 Million Verdict Against Bishop Abbey Homes

    April 08, 2014 —
    A Rockwall County, Texas “jury has awarded a $20.8 million verdict against a Dallas homebuilder for performing substandard work on a local family's home and refusing to accept responsibility,” according to a press release published in The Wall Street Journal. The lawsuit alleged that “the defendants were aware that the site of the Hales' future Highpoint Lake Estates home had significant foundation defects before construction began. The Hales said Mr. Halsey later promised that his company would take responsibility by fixing the structural defects that arose after construction, but he reneged and refused to repair the problems.” The award included “damages for the cost of repairs, lost value and additional penalties based on Mr. Halsey's actions and the defendants' ‘grossly negligent’ conduct, including violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The jury award includes attorneys' fees for the Hales' legal team.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Private Mediations Do Not Toll The Five-Year Prosecution Statute

    April 28, 2016 —
    If you thought private mediation could toll the five-year period for case prosecution – think again. In a recent decision handed down by the Second District Court of Appeal, the court unequivocally held that voluntary, private mediations do not toll the five-year period before dismissal for failure to bring an action to trial. California Code of Civil Procedure section 583.310 sets forth the applicable rule: “[a]n action shall be brought to trial within five years after the action is commenced against the defendant.” Section 1775.7(b) clarifies this rule, stating that the five-year period can be tolled if it is “submitted to mediation” within the final six months of the five-year period. However, the Code is silent with respect to the effect of tolling on public versus private mediations. The Court of Appeal addressed this issue in its recent decision entitled Castillo v. DHL Express (USA) (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 1186. Castillo was an employment class action brought by truck drivers against their employers. Plaintiffs argued that the case was “submitted to mediation” within the meaning of Section 1775.7(b) because the court’s Case Management Order reflected the fact that the parties agreed to pursue mediation. Conversely, defendants argued that the Case Management Statement clearly stated that the parties voluntarily agreed to a private mediation, not a court-ordered mediation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Zachary P. Marks, Chapman Glucksman Dean Roeb & Barger In Focus
    Mr. Marks may be contacted at zmarks@cgdrblaw.com