• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    townhome construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington casino resort Building Consultant Seattle Washington retail construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington custom homes Building Consultant Seattle Washington high-rise construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington mid-rise construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington multi family housing Building Consultant Seattle Washington institutional building Building Consultant Seattle Washington production housing Building Consultant Seattle Washington industrial building Building Consultant Seattle Washington condominium Building Consultant Seattle Washington parking structure Building Consultant Seattle Washington tract home Building Consultant Seattle Washington landscaping construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington office building Building Consultant Seattle Washington Subterranean parking Building Consultant Seattle Washington condominiums Building Consultant Seattle Washington custom home Building Consultant Seattle Washington hospital construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington Medical building Building Consultant Seattle Washington structural steel construction Building Consultant Seattle Washington concrete tilt-up Building Consultant Seattle Washington
    Seattle Washington roofing construction expertSeattle Washington expert witness roofingSeattle Washington fenestration expert witnessSeattle Washington construction scheduling and change order evaluation expert witnessSeattle Washington civil engineering expert witnessSeattle Washington soil failure expert witnessSeattle Washington building code expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Consultant 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 Consultant Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Seattle Washington

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

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

    North Peninsula Builders Association
    Local # 4927
    PO Box 748
    Port Angeles, WA 98362
    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

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

    Seattle Washington Building Consultant 10/ 10

    Building Consultant News and Information
    For Seattle Washington

    EPA Announces that January 2017 Revised RMP Rules are Now Effective

    Colorado Senate Voted to Kill One of Three Construction Defect Bills

    Not Everything is a Pollutant: A Summary of Recent Cases Supporting a Common Sense and Narrow Interpretation of the CGL's Pollution Exclusion

    Important New Reporting Requirement for Some Construction Defect Settlements

    New Case Alert: Oregon Supreme Court Prohibits Insurer’s Attempt to Relitigate Insured’s Liability

    How is Negotiating a Construction Contract Like Buying a Car?

    Construction Industry on the Comeback, But It Won’t Be the Same

    New York City Construction: Boom Times Again?

    Amid the Chaos, Trump Signs Executive Order Streamlining Environmental Permitting and Disbands Infrastructure Council

    Ten Newmeyer & Dillion Attorneys Selected to the Best Lawyers in America© 2019

    Think Twice Before Hedging A Position Or Defense On A Speculative Event Or Occurrence

    "Occurrence" May Include Intentional Acts In Montana

    Digital Twins for a Safer Built Environment

    Harsh New Time Limits on Construction Defect Claims

    Cable-Free Elevators Will Soar to New Heights, and Move Sideways

    Smart Cities Offer New Ideas for Connectivity

    Wow! A Mechanic’s Lien Bill That Helps Subcontractors and Suppliers

    Manhattan to Add Most Office Space Since ’90 Over 3 Years

    Buyer's Demolishing of Insured's Home Not Barred by Faulty Construction Exclusion

    U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in on Construction Case

    Eleventh Circuit Rules That Insurer Must Defend Contractor Despite “Your Work” Exclusion, Where Damage Timing Unclear

    Structural Failure of Precast-Concrete Span Sets Back Sydney Metro Job

    Am I Still Covered Under the Title Insurance Policy?

    COVID-izing Your Construction Contract

    The Impact of Sopris Lodging v. Schofield Excavation on Timeliness of Colorado Construction Defect Claims

    2011 Worst Year Ever for Home Sales

    Court of Appeal Shines Light on Collusive Settlement Agreements

    Illusory Insurance Coverage: Real or Unreal?

    No Coverage Under Exclusions For Wind and Water Damage

    Between Scylla and Charybids: The Mediation Privilege and Legal Malpractice Claims

    Courts Will Not Rewrite Your Post-Loss Property Insurance Obligations

    Colorado House Bill 20-1290 – Restriction on the Use of Failure to Cooperate Defense in First-Party Claims

    Insurers Reacting to Massachusetts Tornadoes

    Contractors Should Be Optimistic that the Best Value Tradeoff Process Will Be Employed by Civilian Agencies

    When it Comes to Trials, it’s Like a Box of Chocolates. Sometimes You Get the Icky Cream Filled One

    Manhattan Gets First Crowdfunded Condos

    Court Orders House to be Demolished or Relocated

    Construction Defect Lawsuit May Affect Home Financing

    White and Williams Announces Lawyer Promotions

    Sinking Buildings on the Rise?

    Dump Site Provider Has Valid Little Miller Act Claim

    New California Employment Laws Affect the Construction Industry for 2019

    Triple Points to the English Court of Appeal for Clarifying the Law on LDs

    Karen Campbell, Kristen Perkins to Speak at CLM 2020 Annual Conference in Dallas

    Liability Cap Does Not Exclude Defense Costs for Loss Related to Deep Water Horizon

    Feds, County Seek Delay in Houston $7B Road Widening Over Community Impact

    The Coronavirus, Zoom Meetings and Now a CCPA Class Action

    Legislative Changes that Impact Construction 2017

    Subcontractors Have a Duty to Clarify Ambiguities in Bid Documents

    Philadelphia Revises Realty Transfer Tax Treatment of Acquired Real Estate Companies
    Corporate Profile


    The Seattle, Washington Building Consultant 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 Consultant News & Info
    Seattle, Washington

    Blindly Relying on Public Adjuster or Loss Consultant’s False Estimate Can Play Out Badly

    May 03, 2021 —
    Insurance policies, particularly property insurance policies, have a concealment or fraud provision that, in essence, gives the insurer an out if the insured submits a fraudulent claim, a false claim, or conceals material facts. Unlike a traditional fraud claim where a party needs to prove intent, the provision is broad enough that it does not require any intent behind making a false statement. See Mezadieu v. Safepoint Ins. Co., 46 Fla.L.Weekly D691c (Fla. 4th DCA 2021). For this reason, and as exemplified below, do NOT blindly rely on a public adjuster or loss consultant’s estimate that contains false statements because those false statements, particularly if you know they are false, can play out badly for you! Review the estimate and ask questions about it to make sure you understand what is being included in the loss or damages estimate. In Mezadieu, a homeowner submitted a claim to her property insurance carrier due to a second-floor water leak emanating from her bathroom. She submitted an estimate from her public adjuster that included damages for her kitchen cabinets directly below the second-floor bathroom, as well as other items on her first-floor. Her carrier denied coverage based on the exclusion that the policy excludes damage caused by “[c]onstant or repeated seepage of water or steam…which occurs over a period of time.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Sometimes a Reminder is in Order. . .

    June 21, 2021 —
    Recently, I was talking with my friend Matt Hundley about a recent case he had in the Charlottesville, VA Circuit Court. It was a relatively straightforward (or so he and I would have thought) breach of contract matter involving a fixed price contract between his (and an associate of his Laura Hooe) client James River Stucco and the Montecello Overlook Owners’ Association. I believe that you will see the reason for the title of the post once you hear the facts and read the opinion. In James River Stucco, Inc. v. Monticello Overlook Owners’ Ass’n, the Court considered Janes River Stucco’s Motion for Summary Judgment countering two arguments made by the Association. The first Association argument was that the word “employ” in the contract meant that James River Stucco was required to use its own forces (as opposed to subcontractors) to perform the work. The second argument was that James River overcharged for the work. This second argument was made without any allegation of fraud or that the work was not 100% performed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at

    Arguing Cardinal Change is Different than Proving Cardinal Change

    April 05, 2021 —
    The cardinal change doctrine has become a popular doctrine for a contractor to argue under but remains an extremely difficult doctrine to support and prove. Arguing cardinal change is one thing. Proving cardinal change is entirely different. As shown below, this is a doctrine with its origins under federal government contract law with arguments extending outside of the federal government contract arena. For this reason, the cases referenced below are not federal government contract law cases, but are cases where the cardinal change doctrine has been argued (even though these cases cite to federal government contract law cases). A party argues cardinal change to demonstrate that the other party (generally, the owner) materially breached the contract based on the cardinal change. In reality, a party argues cardinal change because they have cost overruns they are looking to recover and this doctrine may give them an argument to do so. But it is important to recognize the distinction between raising it as an argument and the expectation that this (difficult doctrine to prove) will carry the day. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David Adelstein, Kirwin Norris, P.A.
    Mr. Adelstein may be contacted at

    Everybody Is Going to End Up Paying for Texas' Climate Crisis

    March 29, 2021 —
    Fallout from last month’s deadly deep freeze in Texas has quietly spread to people living hundreds of miles away. Minnesota utilities have warned that monthly heating bills could spike by $400, after the crisis jacked up natural gas prices across the country. Xcel Energy’s Colorado customers could face a $7.50 per month surcharge for the next two years. This is a subtle demonstration of the way Americans already share the collective financial burden of climate change, even if we don’t realize it. The national bill for global warming is here, and it’s rising. Perhaps it’s easier to see this dynamic playing out beyond February’s Texas cold snap. That disaster left dozens dead, stranded millions in dark homes, and sent a shockwave of higher gas prices across the nation. But since there remains scientific uncertainty over the role of global warming, let’s examine two other calamities for which the climate link is clearer: wildfires and tropical storms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David R Baker & Mark Chediak, Bloomberg

    Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Is a Green Jobs Plan

    April 26, 2021 —
    “Once you put capital money to work, jobs are created.” These are not the words of President Joe Biden, announcing his administration’s infrastructure plan in Pittsburgh on Wednesday. Nor were they the words of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, standing on a train platform to announce expanded service, or of any of the administration’s economists charged with touting the virtues of the $2.25 trillion spending plan. It was Michael Morris, then-CEO of Ohio utility American Electric Power, who uttered them on an investor call a decade ago. AEP was fighting an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to reduce mercury and other pollutants from power plants, citing the expense of creating jobs to install new scrubbers on smokestacks or build cleaner plants. Morris, taking his fiduciary responsibility to the utility’s investors seriously, argued these new roles would come at a cost to AEP and were, thus, bad. What he did not question, and correctly so, was whether more investments would indeed create more jobs. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Gernot Wagner, Bloomberg

    Congratulations Devin Brunson on His Promotion to Partner!

    April 26, 2021 —
    Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara, LLP is very proud to announce Devin Brunson has been promoted to the position of partner with the firm! Mr. Brunson came to BWB&O from another civil litigation firm and helped start the Denver, Colorado office along with partners Lucian Greco, John Toohey and Peter Brown. He has taken on a significant leadership role within the firm over the past several years and has been integral in growing the office to its current footprint. He is licensed to practice law in Colorado, District of Colorado, and in the U.S. District Court. His practice is focused in the areas of civil and business litigation, construction litigation, and employment law. Mr. Brunson has a diverse practice background that includes complex civil litigation and intellectual property disputes and has had the privilege of representing business owners, contractors, corporate executives, and professional athletes during the course of his career. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Dolores Montoya, Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara LLP

    Construction Contractors Must Understand Retainage In 2021

    May 24, 2021 —
    Retainage has become a vital part of the contracting and construction process. If defined precisely, retainage is a practice of withholding a particular percentage of the payment until the project is delivered. However, the practice can turn to be a challenge for small contractors, as it is laid over a lack of trust in the potential and abilities of a contractor, which might cause financial downtime at the later stages of the project when contractors need to pay bills. Since 2020 proved to be a tough year for the entire construction industry, project owners, general contractors and construction firms new to the industry must understand what exactly retainage is. It is equally important for small contractors and subcontractors to understand the right way to manage the retainage. Reprinted courtesy of Ed Williams, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle Obtains Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant

    April 19, 2021 —
    Traub Lieberman Partner Lisa M. Rolle obtained summary judgment in favor of defendant SRI Fire Sprinkler, LLC, a family-owned and operated fire sprinkler company which generally provides fire sprinkler installation, inspection, and maintenance services throughout the Northeast and New England. The judgment was determined pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) on the grounds that Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company’s (Plaintiff) negligent construction claim accrued on the date when work was completed at the premises, not on the date of the incident as alleged in the Plaintiff’s complaint. In the underlying subrogation action, the Plaintiff commenced the action in subrogation of its insured, Bet Am Shalom Synagogue (Bet Am), to recover damages in excess of $173,390.86 which it allegedly paid to Bet Am for water damage cleanup and remodeling after certain sprinkler pipes froze and burst in the recently constructed wing of the Westchester synagogue on January 1, 2019 and January 7, 2019. The Plaintiff alleged that its subrogor, Bet Am, sustained interior water damage on the first floor and basement levels of the premises, including the carpets, drywall, insulation, bathroom, kitchen and appliances, dining room, hallways, closets, basement storage rooms and supplies, and basement classrooms. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Lisa M. Rolle, Traub Lieberman
    Ms. Rolle may be contacted at