BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    condominiums building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington Medical building building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington retail construction building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington townhome construction building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington structural concrete expertSeattle Washington construction defect expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witnesses fenestrationSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington engineering consultantSeattle 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


    Discussion of History of Construction Defect Litigation in California

    In Colorado, Repair Vendors Can Bring First-Party Bad Faith Actions For Amounts Owed From an Insurer

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

    Home Sales Topping $100 Million Smash U.S. Price Records

    Can We Compel Insurers To Cover Construction Defect in General Liability Policies?

    U.S. Building Permits Soared to Their Highest Level in Nearly Eight Years

    A Loud Boom, But No Serious Injuries in World Trade Center Accident

    Housing Starts Plunge by the Most in Four Years

    Repairing One’s Own Work and the one Year Statute of Limitations to Sue a Miller Act Payment Bond

    Economist Predicts Housing Starts to Rise in 2014

    Be a Good Neighbor: Protect Against Claims by an Adjacent Landowner During Construction

    What Rich Millennials Want in a Luxury Home: 20,000 Square Feet

    Spain Risks €10.6 Billion Flood Damage Bill, Sanchez Says

    New Window Insulation Introduced to U.S. Market

    Behavioral Science Meets Construction: Insights from Whistle Rewards

    Insurance Litigation Roundup: “Post No Bills!”

    Construction Defect Claim Survives Insurer's Summary Judgment Motion Due to Lack of Evidence

    A Glimpse Into Post-Judgment Collections and Perhaps the Near Future?

    Third Circuit Court of Appeals Concludes “Soup to Nuts” Policy Does Not Include Faulty Workmanship Coverage

    For Breach of Contract Claim, There Needs to be a Breach of a Contractual Duty

    What Happens When a Secured Creditor Files a Late Claim in an Equity Receivership?

    Solar and Wind Just Passed Another Big Turning Point

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

    New York Philharmonic Will Open Geffen Hall Two Years Ahead of Schedule

    No Occurrence Found for Damage to Home Caused by Settling

    Housing Starts in U.S. Drop to Lowest Level in Three Months

    Defining Catastrophic Injury Claims

    Eliminating Waste in Construction – An Interview with Turner Burton

    Ninth Circuit Construes Known Loss Provision

    Prison Time and Restitution for Construction Fraud

    Meet the Hipster Real Estate Developers Building for Millennials

    Construction Companies Can Be Liable for “Secondary Exposure” of Asbestos to Household Members

    Federal Judge Rips Shady Procurement Practices at DRPA

    No Coverage For Construction Defects When Complaint Alleges Contractual Damages

    Infrared Photography Illuminates Construction Defects and Patent Trolling

    Struggling Astaldi Announces Defaults on Florida Highway Contracts

    Modification: Exceptions to Privette Doctrine Do Not Apply Where There is No Evidence a General Contractor Affirmatively Contributed to the Injuries of an Independent Contractor’s Employee

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    LAX Runway Lawsuit a Year Too Late?

    World Cup May Pull Out of Brazil because of Construction Delays

    UK Construction Output Rises Unexpectedly to Strongest Since May

    Recycled Water and New Construction. New Standards Being Considered

    Florida’s Fourth District Appeals Court Clarifies What Actions Satisfy Florida’s Construction Defect Statute of Repose

    Recent Bribery and Anti-Corruption Enforcement Trends in Global Construction Industry

    Virginia Allows Condominium Association’s Insurer to Subrogate Against a Condominium Tenant

    Assessing Defective Design Liability on Federal Design-Build Projects

    Natural Hydrogen May Seem New in Town, but It’s Been Here All Along

    Newmeyer & Dillion Announces Three New Partners

    Repairs to Hurricane-damaged Sanibel Causeway Completed in 105 Days

    White and Williams Announces the Election of Five Lawyers to the Partnership and the Promotion of Five Associates to Counsel
    Corporate Profile

    SEATTLE WASHINGTON BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Seattle, Washington Building Expert Group is comprised from a number of credentialed construction professionals possessing extensive trial support experience relevant to construction defect and claims matters. Leveraging from more than 25 years experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to the nation's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, Fortune 500 builders, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, and a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Product Manufacturers Beware: You May Be Subject to Jurisdiction in Massachusetts

    July 05, 2023 —
    Say you are a Floridian product manufacturer that does business in Massachusetts and you receive a Complaint filed in Massachusetts that alleges your product injured a Nova Scotian resident in Nova Scotia. You know that the only time that product was in Massachusetts was during its transport up the eastern seaboard to its final destination at a retailer in Nova Scotia. Can you be hailed into a Massachusetts court for this accident? The answer is seemingly not so simple following the Supreme Judicial Court’s holding in Doucet v. FCA US LLC. On June 8th, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in Doucet v. FCA US LLC, held that FCA US LLC is subject to jurisdiction in Massachusetts for a personal injury action arising out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred in New Hampshire. No. SJC-13354, slip. op. (Mass. June 8, 2023). The vehicle had been purchased in New Hampshire by a New Hampshire resident. The Court explained that federal due process does not require a causal connection between a company’s business dealings with the jurisdiction and the injury; instead, a mere relationship between the business dealings and the injury will suffice to establish jurisdiction. Because the vehicle at issue was first sold in Massachusetts and FCA US LLC had extensive business dealings unrelated to the vehicle in question in Massachusetts, the Court concluded that a strong enough relationship existed between FCA US LLC, Massachusetts, and the litigation for jurisdiction to exist. Reprinted courtesy of Timothy Keough, White and Williams LLP and Audrey Schoenike, White and Williams LLP Mr. Keough may be contacted at keought@whiteandwilliams.com Ms. Schoenike may be contacted at schoenikea@whiteandwilliams.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    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

    Insurer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Construction Defect Claim Rejected

    January 22, 2024 —
    The magistrate judge recommended that the insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied in a case involving coverage for the insured subcontractor's alleged faulty workmanship. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190019 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2023). Cone & Graham (C&G), the general contractor, subcontracted with Sonny Glasbrenner, Inc. (SGI) to work on the project. The project involved the rehabilitation of a bridge due to deterioration of the existing concrete bridge deck by adding additional cross bracing to further stiffen the steel girders and using special lightweight concrete. C&G contracted SGH to demolish the existing concrete bridge deck. SGI completed the work. Thereafter, C&G made a demand to SGI for alleged damaged caused by SGI's work. C&G alleged that SGI was negligent in performing the demolition work, causing substantial damage to the existing bridge girders. C&G sued SGI. 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

    No Third-Quarter Gain for Construction

    November 18, 2011 —

    The Associated Builders and Contractors released their analysis of construction work under contract and found that there was no increase in construction backlog from the second quarter of 2011. There was still improvement, however, over 2010, as the third quarter backlog is 16.3 percent higher than that of a year ago.

    The current backlog is 8.1 months, which according to Anirban Basu, the chief economist of the ABC, “is consistent with flat construction spending.” He noted that less than 8 months indicated a decline.

    Read the full story…

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

    Housing Agency Claims It Is Not a Party in Construction Defect Case

    February 28, 2013 —
    The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) is seeking to be removed from a construction defect suit filed by Aspen homeowners. APCHA claims that it should not be a party to the suit, since it had nothing to do with the development of the Burlingame Ranch community. Responsibility should instead, according to the agency, rest with the City of Aspen. APCHA’s role was to sell the homes to individuals whom it had verified were eligible to purchase affordable housing. Tom McCabe, the director of APCHA said that “APCHA has no part in the building of housing anymore, and we haven’t for a long time.” Chris Rhody, who represents the Burlingame homeowners, feels that APCHA should be involved. The homeowners are alleging that construction defects, including cracked exterior siding, are the result of faulty materials and improper installation. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Massive Redesign Turns Newark Airport Terminal Into a Foodie Theme Park

    March 05, 2015 —
    You wait on what looks like a Soviet bread line. You show your I.D. to a guard. You take off your shoes, empty your pockets, and surrender to a digital scanner. Fortunately, there’s always a bevy of gleaming cocktail bars and foodie outposts welcoming you to the other side. No? Get ready. That’s the plan for United Airlines’ Terminal C at Newark Liberty International Airport—a $120 million redesign that includes 55 dining venues with enough celebrity-chef cameos to rival the glitziest of Las Vegas casinos. Instead of the usual McDonald’s, TCBY, and Sbarro, there will be restaurants serving up far-ranging cuisine, from authentic ramen and tacos to gourmet, Neapolitan-style pizza and Swedish meatballs. Since the terminal must remain in operation, all the structures will be assembled off-site and dropped in next year to keep construction time to a minimum. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Belinda Lanks, Bloomberg

    Insurer Must Defend Claims of Alleged Willful Coal Removal

    June 21, 2017 —
    The court found that the insured was entitled to a defense against claims for its alleged willful removal of coal from third parties' land. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Bizzack Constr, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70285 (W.D. Va. April 27, 2017). The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) contracted with Bizzack to perform work in widening U.S. Route 460. VDOT notified coal owners that it had been "necessary to remove certain coal" from their land during the construction of Route 460. Some of the coal owners sued Bizzack, seeking compensation for lost coal. They alleged Bizzack had illegally removed and sold their coal, and "damaged the remaining coal in place on the property." Bizzack sought coverage from Liberty Mutual. Liberty Mutual filed suit seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Bizzack. Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed. Liberty Mutual argued: (1) there was no "occurrence"; (2) exclusion j (5) applied; and (3) the "expected or intended injury" exclusion applied. 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

    Pennsylvania Court Finds that Two Possible Causes Can Prove a Product Malfunction Theory of Liability

    September 29, 2021 —
    In Allstate Ins. Co. v. LG Elecs. USA, Inc., No. 19-3529, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania considered whether plaintiff’s expert engineer’s opinion that there were two possible causes of a fire—both related to alleged product defects within a refrigerator manufactured by the defendant—was sufficient to support the malfunction theory of products liability. The court found that because both potential causes imposed liability on the product manufacturer and the expert ruled out misuse of the product, as well as all external causes of the fire, it was not necessary for the engineer to identify a specific cause under the malfunction theory. The court also found that the expert’s investigation and opinions met the criteria set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) and the Federal Rules of Evidence and, thus, were admissible. LG Electronics arose from a fire at the home of Thomas and Lisa Ellis. The public sector fire investigator identified the area of fire origin as the top of a refrigerator manufactured by LG Electronics USA, Inc. (LG). The Ellises filed a claim with their homeowner’s insurance carrier, Allstate Insurance Company (Insurer). Insurer retained a fire investigator and an electrical engineer to investigate the origin and cause of the fire. The fire investigator agreed with the public sector investigator that the fire originated at the top of the refrigerator. The engineer conducted a forensic inspection of the scene and ruled out all potential external ignition sources. He then examined the internal components of the refrigerator. He found arcing activity on a wire at the front top of the refrigerator. He opined that there were two possible causes of the fire: either the heater circuit insulation failed over time due to mechanical damage, or the heat from the internal light fixture ignited combustible components of the refrigerator. Since the engineer ruled out improper use of the refrigerator, he opined that the damage was caused by a manufacturing defect. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gus Sara, White and Williams
    Mr. Sara may be contacted at sarag@whiteandwilliams.com