BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    retail construction building expert Seattle Washington industrial building building expert Seattle Washington Subterranean parking building expert Seattle Washington landscaping construction building expert Seattle Washington low-income housing building expert Seattle Washington custom home building expert Seattle Washington high-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington condominium building expert Seattle Washington custom homes building expert Seattle Washington structural steel construction building expert Seattle Washington hospital construction building expert Seattle Washington casino resort building expert Seattle Washington mid-rise construction building expert Seattle Washington multi family housing building expert Seattle Washington tract home building expert Seattle Washington parking structure building expert Seattle Washington institutional building building expert Seattle Washington condominiums building expert Seattle Washington production housing building expert Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up building expert Seattle Washington housing building expert Seattle Washington office building building expert Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington consulting architect expert witnessSeattle Washington window expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness windowsSeattle Washington delay claim expert witnessSeattle Washington reconstruction expert witnessSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington civil engineer 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


    Flint Water Crisis and America’s Clean Water Access Failings

    Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Applied to Pass-Through Agreements

    Unwrapped Pipes Lead to Flooding and Construction Defect Lawsuit

    First Circuit Rejects Insurer’s “Insupportable” Duty-to-Cooperate Defense in Arson Coverage Suit

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

    #2 CDJ Topic: Valley Crest Landscape v. Mission Pools

    Deadlines Count for Construction Defects in Florida

    GRSM Team Wins Summary Judgment in Million-Dollar HOA Dispute

    A Trio of Environmental Decisions from the Fourth Circuit

    Insurer’s Discovery Requests Ruled to be Overbroad in Construction Defect Suit

    Hunton Insurance Partner Among Top 250 Women in Litigation

    Fire Fears After Grenfell Disaster Set Back Wood Building in UK

    Solicitor General’s Views to Supreme Court on Two Circuit Court Rulings that Groundwater Can be Considered “Waters of the United States”

    Colorado Senate Bill 13-052 Dies in Committee

    Contractors’ Right to Sue in Washington Requires Registration

    California Court of Appeals Says, “We Like Eich(leay)!”

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    NYC Supertall Tower Condo Board Sues Over Alleged Construction, Design 'Defects'

    London Is Falling Down and It's Because of Climate Change

    Injured Subcontractor Employee Asserts Premise Liability Claim Against General Contractor

    Lien Waivers Should Be Fair — And Efficient

    Customer’s Agreement to Self-Insure and Release for Water Damage Effectively Precludes Liability of Storage Container Company

    Three Steps to a Safer Jobsite

    No Concrete Answers on Whether Construction Defects Are Occurrences

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage

    More Charges Anticipated in Las Vegas HOA Scam

    Chicago Criticized for Not Maintaining Elevator Inspections

    Hollywood Legend Betty Grable’s Former Home for Sale

    The Top 3 Trends That Will Impact the Construction Industry in 2024

    Napa Quake, Flooding Cost $4 Billion in U.S. in August

    A Property Boom Is Coming to China's Smaller Cities

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    Ill-fated Complaint Fails to State Claims Against Broker and FEMA

    Scaffolding Collapse Kills Workers at China Construction Site

    Wood Product Rotting in New Energy Efficient Homes

    Texas Shortens Its Statute of Repose To 6 Years, With Limitations

    Construction Contracts Fall in Denver

    Increase in Single-Family New Home Sales Year-Over-Year in January

    Large Canada Employers and Jobsites Mandate COVID-19 Vaccines

    Three's a Trend: Second, Fourth and Ninth Circuits Uphold Broad "Related Claims" Language

    William Doerler Recognized by JD Supra 2022 Readers’ Choice Awards

    Public Adjuster Cannot Serve As Disinterested Appraiser

    Hunton Insurance Recovery Lawyers Ranked by Chambers as Top Insurance Practitioners

    California Beach Hotel to Get $185 Million Luxury Rebuild

    Construction Workers Unearth Bones

    Missouri Protects Subrogation Rights

    Res Judicata Not Apply to Bar Overlapping Damages in Separate Suits Against Contractor and Subcontractor

    Suzanne Pollack Elected to Lawyers Club of San Diego 2021 Board of Directors

    Doctrine of Merger Not a Good Blend for Seller of Sonoma Winery Property

    Wilke Fleury Attorneys Awarded Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar
    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

    Conditional Judgment On Replacement Costs Awarded

    January 07, 2015 —
    The appellate court determined that a conditional judgment on replacement costs was appropriate after the insurer denied coverage. Stephens & Stephens XII, LLC v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 1073 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 24, 2014). Stephens operated a large industrial warehouse. It initially purchased a commercial liability policy from Fireman's Fund when an tenant occupied the building. After the tenant left, Stephens purchased from Fireman's Fund property coverage on June 28, 2007. On July 1, Stephens discovered that burglars had caused more than $2 million in damage to the property. All conductive material was stripped from the building and taken away. There was water damage throughout the building. The estimated cost of repair exceeded $1 million. Stephens notified Fireman's Fund. The insurer paid emergency repairs, but it neither accepted nor denied coverage for the loss. Finally, five years after the incident and on the eve of trial, Fireman's Fund denied coverage. 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

    Arizona Rooftop Safety: Is it Adequate or Substandard?

    October 01, 2014 —
    The Wall Street Journal reported that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently “took the unprecedented step of formally proposing to take over construction workplace safety in Arizona because it said the state doesn't require proper fall protection.” OSHA’s deputy director, Jordan Barab, told the Wall Street Journal, “We told them we did not think their standard…was at least as effective as ours.” However, “[a] spokeswoman for Arizona's state workplace enforcement agency countered that the state's requirements are adequate, adding that it will respond to the federal notice ‘as appropriate.’” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Environmental Roundup – May 2019

    July 09, 2019 —
    Federal Courts of Appeal Dam Claims Collapse On May 7, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decided the case of Navelski, et al. v. International Paper Company. After a major storm, a dam constructed by International Paper to serve the operations of its local paper mill, was breached, releasing millions of gallons of water into a nearby creek resulting in the flooding of many homes located downstream from the creek. IP was sued by the homeowners in a class action, alleging negligence and strict liability for conducting an abnormally dangerous activity. The trial court dismissed the strict liability claim, and the jury found IP was not negligent in the operation of the dam. On appeal, the court upheld the jury verdict, agreeing that the verdict was supported by the evidence heard by the jury. The appeals court also agreed that the strict liability claim was properly dismissed as a matter of law because the operation of this dam was not an abnormally dangerous activity under Florida law. The plaintiffs had also argued that the jury should not have been advised that the home county, Escambia County, has applied for a FEMA grant which apparently made the case that some of the downstream homes were naturally prone to flooding. A redacted version of the application was allowed to be shown to the jury, but the appeals court held that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the court ruling was prejudicial. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Anthony B. Cavender, Pillsbury
    Mr. Cavender may be contacted at anthony.cavender@pillsburylaw.com

    COVID-19 Is Not Direct Physical Loss Or Damage

    April 13, 2020 —
    Is a cash register that is not being used damaged property? When you need to wash a table, a chair, or a section of flooring with readily available cleaning products to make them safe and useable, are you repairing damaged property? Is a spilled cup of coffee waiting to be wiped up actual damage to the premises? If your customers stay home to help stop the spread of a virus, has there been a physical loss inside your shuttered store or restaurant? The insuring agreements typically found in commercial property insurance policies require “direct physical loss of or damage to” covered property as the triggering event. Without establishing direct physical loss or damage a policyholder cannot meet its burden to trigger coverage for a purely economic loss of business income resulting from shuttering its business due to concerns over exposure to—or even the actual presence of—COVID-19. Despite this well-understood policy language, it is already beyond question that insurers will confront creative—albeit strained—arguments from policyholder firms attempting to trigger coverage for pure economic loss. The scope of the human and economic tragedy we all face will be matched by the scope of the effort to force the financial harm onto insurance companies. The plaintiffs in what appears to be the first-filed case seeking a declaratory judgment in the context of first-party insurance coverage rely on the assertion that “contamination of the insured premises by the Coronavirus would be a direct physical loss needing remediation to clean the surfaces” of its establishment, a New Orleans restaurant, to trigger coverage for business interruption.[1] See Cajun Conti, LLC, et. al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et. al. Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. The complaint alleges that the property is insured under an “all risk policy” defining “covered causes of loss” as “direct physical loss.” The plaintiffs rely on the alleged presence of the virus on “the surface of objects” in certain conditions and the need to clean those surfaces. They go so far as to claim that “[a]ny effort by [the insurer] to deny the reality that the virus causes physical damage and loss would constitute a false and potentially fraudulent misrepresentation. . . .” Reprinted courtesy of Gordon & Rees attorneys Joseph Blyskal, Dennis Brown and Michelle Bernard Mr. Blyskal may be contacted at tblatchley@grsm.com Mr. Brown may be contacted at dbrown@grsm.com Ms. Bernard may be contacted at mbernard@grsm.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Would You Trade a Parking Spot for an Extra Bedroom?

    August 23, 2021 —
    A bill wending its way through the California Legislature could suddenly make a lot more new housing economically feasible. Known as AB 1401, the legislation would abolish local parking requirements for new residential and commercial developments near bus or train stops. It applies to counties with more than 600,000 residents and cities with more than 75,000 people. The bill does not prohibit or restrict parking. It merely deregulates it, allowing developers to decide what works best for a given project. It opens up the possibility, for example, of providing parking in an off-site garage or lot. It permits tandem parking to save space or subsidized shared ride services. It doesn’t prescribe a one-size-fits-all solution to how buildings can best serve the people who use them, and it allows flexibility as transportation options evolve. Most homeowners and tenants want some sort of parking, but local mandates can be extreme — and extremely expensive. Twenty-one California towns even require more than three parking places for a three-bedroom single-family home. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Virginia Postrel, Bloomberg

    Will Future Megacities Be a Marvel or a Mess? Look at New Delhi

    November 14, 2018 —
    The effects of unbridled urbanization are inescapable in India’s capital city. Smog blankets landmarks like India Gate in winter, delaying flights at the airport due to poor visibility. Traffic jams are part of the daily routine and slums abut New Delhi’s luxury hotels and private mansions, testifying to a growing wealth divide and chronic housing shortage. And every day, the problem gets bigger. More than 27 million people live in and around Delhi with about 700,000 more joining them each year, according to research firm Demographia. The United Nations forecasts that by 2028 the population could outstrip Tokyo’s to make Delhi the world’s biggest megacity. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Jill Ward, Bloomberg

    Construction Bidding for Success

    May 22, 2023 —
    When construction companies develop a history of successful projects, they often consider bidding on larger projects. However, larger projects can carry greater risks. If your company has successfully completed numerous $10 million projects and is considering a bid on a $100 million project, there are several factors to consider before submitting a proposal. That is because bidding on the wrong project could potentially put you out of business. “When a contractor bids a larger project, there is a greater financial risk,” says Tim Holicky, a senior executive underwriter at The Hartford. There are more subcontractors to manage and additional materials to purchase, which all leads to greater financial risk. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Hartford Staff, The Hartford Insights

    Mortgagors Seek Coverage Under Mortgagee's Policy

    July 19, 2021 —
    The mortgagor homeowners survived a motion to dismiss their claim for coverageunder the lender's property policy after their home suffered hurricane damage. Gary v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100010 (W.D. La. May 26, 2021). Plaintiffs' home was mortgaged by Pennymac Loan Services, LLC. Pennymac held a property policy with American Security to insure its interest in the home. Plaintiffs were not named as insureds or additional insureds under the policy. Plaintiffs were identified as the borrowers under the policy on the Declarations page. After hurricane damage to their home, plaintiffs sued American Security for coverage for the losses. American Security moved to dismiss, arguing plaintiffs were neither additional insureds nor third party beneficiaries. Lender-placed policies were designed to insure the lender's collateral whenever the borrower failed to maintain adequate insurance. The Loss Payment provisions in the policy stated that "Loss will be made payable to the named insured [Pennymac]. No coverage will be available to any mortgagee other than that shown as the named insured on the Declarations." 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