• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    high-rise construction expert witness Seattle Washington low-income housing expert witness Seattle Washington hospital construction expert witness Seattle Washington townhome construction expert witness Seattle Washington tract home expert witness Seattle Washington structural steel construction expert witness Seattle Washington custom home expert witness Seattle Washington parking structure expert witness Seattle Washington Subterranean parking expert witness Seattle Washington office building expert witness Seattle Washington institutional building expert witness Seattle Washington condominium expert witness Seattle Washington landscaping construction expert witness Seattle Washington custom homes expert witness Seattle Washington retail construction expert witness Seattle Washington condominiums expert witness Seattle Washington production housing expert witness Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up expert witness Seattle Washington Medical building expert witness Seattle Washington mid-rise construction expert witness Seattle Washington casino resort expert witness Seattle Washington multi family housing expert witness Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington structural concrete expertSeattle Washington contractor expert witnessSeattle Washington expert witness concrete failureSeattle Washington construction safety expertSeattle Washington OSHA expert witness constructionSeattle Washington civil engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington construction expert testimony
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Expert Witness Engineer 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.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Seattle Washington

    A license is required for plumbing, and electrical trades. Businesses must register with the Secretary of State.

    Expert Witness Engineer Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    MBuilders Association of King & Snohomish Counties
    Local # 4955
    335 116th Ave SE
    Bellevue, WA 98004

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Kitsap County
    Local # 4944
    5251 Auto Ctr Way
    Bremerton, WA 98312

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of Spokane
    Local # 4966
    5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201
    Spokane, WA 99212

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Home Builders Association of North Central
    Local # 4957
    PO Box 2065
    Wenatchee, WA 98801

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    MBuilders Association of Pierce County
    Local # 4977
    PO Box 1913 Suite 301
    Tacoma, WA 98401

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362
    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Jefferson County Home Builders Association
    Local # 4947
    PO Box 1399
    Port Hadlock, WA 98339

    Seattle Washington Expert Witness Engineer 10/ 10

    Expert Witness Engineer News and Information
    For Seattle Washington

    Why Clinton and Trump’s Infrastructure Plans Leave Us Wanting More

    No Duty To Defend Additional Insured When Bodily Injury Not Caused by Insured

    Nonresidential Construction Employment Expands in August, Says ABC

    NYPD Investigating Two White Flags on Brooklyn Bridge

    CSLB Joint Venture Licenses – Providing Contractors With The Means To Expand Their Businesses

    Falling Tree Causing Three Injuries/Deaths Is One Occurrence

    ARUP, Rethinking Green Infrastructure

    Texas covered versus uncovered allocation and “legally obligated to pay.”

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2019 Northern California Super Lawyers

    Points on Negotiating Construction Claims

    NAHB Speaks Out Against the Clean Water Act Expansion

    Remodel Leads to Construction Defect Lawsuit

    Construction Defect Not a RICO Case, Says Court

    New Homes in Palo Alto to Be Electric-Car Ready

    Construction Defects Uncertain Role in Coverage in Pennsylvania

    What Should Be in Every Construction Agreement

    Bill Introduced to give Colorado Shortest Statute of Repose in U.S.

    Best Lawyers Recognizes Twenty White and Williams Lawyers

    School District Gets Expensive Lesson on Prompt Payment Law. But Did the Court Get it Right?

    Mortar Insufficient to Insure Summary Judgment in Construction Defect Case

    Jury Awards Aluminum Company 35 Million in Time Element Losses

    Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Does Not Allege Property Damage, Barring Coverage

    Developer Africa Israel Wins a Round in New York Condominium Battle

    The Starter Apartment Is Nearly Extinct in San Francisco and New York

    Downtown Sacramento Building Riddled with Defects

    Vancouver’s George Massey Tunnel Replacement May Now be a Tunnel Instead of a Bridge

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

    Time is Money. Unless You’re an Insurance Company

    Top 10 Lessons Learned from a Construction Attorney

    Timely Written Notice to Insurer and Cooperating with Insurer

    The Burden of Betterment

    Construction Law Firm Opens in D.C.

    Insurance and Your Roof

    2018 Super Bowl US. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis

    New York Court Enforces Construction Management Exclusion

    Tesla Powerwalls for Home Energy Storage Hit U.S. Market

    Insurer's Withheld Discovery Must be Produced in Bad Faith Case

    Builder Must Respond To Homeowner’s Notice Of Claim Within 14 Days Even If Construction Defect Claim Is Not Alleged With The “Reasonable Detail”

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    Insureds' Summary Judgment Motion on Mold Limitation Denied

    D.R. Horton Profit Beats Estimates as Home Sales Jumped

    #12 CDJ Topic: Am. Home Assur. Co. v. SMG Stone Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75910 (N. D. Cal. June 11, 2015)

    President Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Requires a Viable Statutory Framework (PPP Statutes)[i]

    Showdown Over Landmark Housing Law Looms at U.S. Supreme Court

    Bel Air Mansion Construction Draws Community Backlash

    Construction Problems May Delay Bay Bridge

    Preserving Your Construction Claim

    Property Insurance Exclusion: Leakage of Water Over 14 Days or More

    Premises Liability: Everything You Need to Know

    Insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment in Collapse Case Denied
    Corporate Profile


    The Seattle, Washington Expert Witness Engineer Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 5,500 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.

    Expert Witness Engineer News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Precast Standards' Work Under Way as Brittle Fracture Warnings Aired

    December 22, 2019 —
    The American Concrete Institute is gearing up to develop ACI’s first code requirements specifically for precast concrete. The recent announcement of the initiative comes on the heels of an article in the September issue of ACI’s monthly magazine, Concrete International, that sounds the alarm about the potential for brittle failures of precast, prestressed-concrete double-T parking decks, with flanges reinforced with a non-code-compliant polymer-coated carbon-fiber grid product, called C-Grid. Reprinted courtesy of Nadine M. Post, Engineering News-Record Ms. Post may be contacted at Read the full story... Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Montana Supreme Court: Insurer Not Bound by Insured's Settlement

    December 02, 2019 —
    In Draggin’ Y Cattle Co., Inc. v. Junkermier, et al.1 the Montana Supreme Court held that where an insurer defends its insured and the insured subsequently settles the claims without an insurer’s participation, a court may approve the settlement as between the underlying plaintiff and underlying defendant, but the settlement will not be presumed reasonable as to the insurer. Therefore, an insurer who defends its insured cannot be bound by a stipulated settlement that the insurer did not expressly consent to. The case involved Draggin’ Y Cattle Company (the “Cattle Company”), a ranching and cattle business that utilized the services of an accounting firm, Junkermier, Clark, Campanella, Stevens, P.C. (“Junkermier”), to structure the sale of real property to take advantage of favorable tax treatment. It was discovered that Junkermier’s employee misinformed the Cattle Company’s owners of the tax consequences of the sale. The Cattle Company’s owners subsequently filed suit against Junkermier and its employee and alleged nearly $12,000,000 in damages due to the error. Junkermier’s insurer, New York Marine, provided a defense for Junkermier and its employee. The Cattle Company’s owners offered to settle the claims against Junkermier and its employee for $2,000,000, the policy limit of the New York Marine policy. New York Marine refused to give its consent or tender the policy’s limit. Subsequently, Junkermier, its employee, and the Cattle Company entered into their own settlement agreement for $10,000,000. The settlement was contingent upon a reasonableness hearing to approve the stipulated agreement. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of K. Alexandra Byrd, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.
    Ms. Byrd may be contacted by

    California’s Skilled and Trained Workforce Requirements: Public Works and AB 3018, What You Need to Know

    December 09, 2019 —
    Do you have the proper skilled and trained workforce for your construction projects? If you take on public works projects in California, you may not be in compliance with the new changes in the law. To avoid civil penalties or nonpayment and potentially being precluded from future bids on public works contracts, you must critically review your team and proposal prior to accepting an award. Once awarded a public contact requiring a skilled and trained workforce, diligent reporting practices and oversight are required to maintain compliance. Compliance with California’s skilled and trained workforce requirements for contractors, engineers, architects, design professionals, and suppliers competing for public works construction projects in California is mandated through enforcement with the enactment of AB 3018. Signed by Governor Brown in his last legislative session, AB 3018 dramatically increased the penalties for non-compliance with the existing skilled and trained workforce requirements in California. The new penalties include civil fines by the Labor Commissioner up to $10,000 per month per non-compliant contractor, disqualification from bidding on future public works contract, and withholding of payment for delinquent contractors. This update provides information on California’s skilled and trained workforce requirements, identifies key issues on compliance to avoid penalties, and discusses the impact of enforcement on construction professionals’ business practices. Reprinted courtesy of Brenda Radmacher, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani and Nicholas Krebs, Gordon & Rees Scully Mansukhani Ms. Radmacher may be contacted at Mr. Krebs may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    ‘I’m a Scapegoat,’ Says Former CEO of Dubai Construction Firm

    September 30, 2019 —
    The former chief executive officer of Drake & Scull International PJSC said the company’s accusations of financial violations against him are an attempt to find a “scapegoat” for rising losses. Khaldoun Tabari said the Dubai-based contractor has filed 15 complaints against him to the public prosecutor last year. He said the allegations prompted authorities in the United Arab Emirates to order banks to freeze his bank accounts in June 2018. He denies any wrongdoing. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Layan Odeh & Zainab Fattah, Bloomberg

    Insurance Company’s Reservation of Rights Letter Negates its Interest in the Litigation

    November 12, 2019 —
    The Colorado Court of Appeals held that an insurance company, which issues a reservation of rights letter to its insured, loses its interest in the litigation, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 24(a)(2), when the insured settles the claims and assigns the bad faith action against the insurance company to the plaintiff. Bolt Factory Lofts Owners Association, Inc. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 2019WL 3483901(Colo. App. 2019). In a 2016 lawsuit in Denver District Court, 2016CV3360, the Bolt Factory Loft Owners Association, Inc. (“Association”) asserted construction defect claims against six contractors. Two of those contractors then asserted claims against other subcontractors, including Sierra Glass Co., Inc. (“Sierra Glass”). After multiple settlements, the only remaining claims were those the Association, as assignee of the two contractors, asserted against Sierra Glass. Auto-Owners Insurance Company (“AOIC”) issued policies to Sierra Glass and defended it under a reservation of rights. The policy afforded AOIC the right to defend Sierra Glass, and it required Sierra Glass to cooperate in the defense of the legal action. The Association presented a settlement demand of $1.9 million to Sierra Glass, which AOIC refused to pay. To protect itself from an excess judgment that AOIC might not have paid, Sierra Glass entered into an agreement with the Association whereby Sierra Glass would refrain from offering a defense at trial and assign its bad faith claim against AOIC to the Association in exchange for the Association’s promise that it would not pursue recovery against Sierra Glass of any judgment entered against it at trial. Such agreements, known as Bashor or Nunn Agreements, are allowed in Colorado. Nunn v. Mid-Century Insurance Co., 244 P.3d 116 (Colo. 2010). Therefore, Sierra Glass was entitled to protect itself in the face of AOIC’s potential denial of coverage and refusal to settle. Bolt Factory Lofts, at ¶ 15. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Frank Ingham, Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC
    Mr. Ingham may be contacted at

    Crews Tested By Rocky Ground, Utility Challenges

    September 03, 2019 —
    Problematic utility locations and difficult ground conditions required the project team to develop innovative solutions on the University of Texas at San Antonio’s $95-million Science and Engineering Building. Reprinted courtesy of Louise Poirier, Engineering News-Record Ms. Poirier may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    EPA Threatens Cut in California's Federal Highway Funds

    October 14, 2019 —
    In a new salvo against the state of California, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has threatened to restrict uses for some federal highway aid to the state unless it moves to withdraw what EPA terms “backlogged and unapprovable" plans that outline steps the state would take to reduce pollution and meet Clean Air Act standards. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tom Ichniowski, ENR
    Mr. Ichniowski may be contacted at

    A Few Green Building Notes

    December 02, 2019 —
    This past week, the blogosphere (if that’s even the word these days) has been abuzz about green building and the value that green can add to a project. Three items in particular (among many) got my attention. The first of these was the fact that a new private sustainability rating system is ready for launch. The Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (or ISI) is seeking public comment on its proposed envISIon. This new system (aptly dubbed Version 1.0) will go “live” in July for comment. Why mention this new system? First of all, ISI’s founding members are the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the American Public Works Association (APWA) and the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC). This trio gives the new program some fairly heavy weight backing. Second, while there are rating systems aside from the ever present LEED, none have taken hold in any real way to compete with LEED. I am curious to see if the envISIon system has any better luck. Finally, this shows that sustainable building is of interest to more than the USGBC and those of us that discuss LEED on a daily basis. I find this to be a great thing that could lead to more societal acceptance of sustainable practices as a standard practice rather than a goal. Hopefully such efforts will offset the other two notes that caught my eye recently. The first of these is the foreclosure of the Chapel Hill, North Carolina Greenbridge project. This project is well documented at my friend Doug Reiser’s (@douglasreiser) Builders Counsel blog so I won’t further discuss the details here. However, the question that Doug asks is a good one, i. e. were the “green” elements of the project to blame? Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at