[WSBAPT] DSHS Post-Death Notice of Intent to File Lien

Fri Jun 26 13:03:26 PDT 2026

Wow - that is interesting - I have experienced all but the last part where
they assert they can file a lien beyond the notice period.  Please keep us
posted.

Diane Kiepe
Kiepe Estate and Probate, PLLC
diane at kiepelaw.com
200 N. Mullan Rd., Suite 203
Spokane Valley, WA  99206
509-280-6414
Confidentiality Notice: This page and any accompanying documents contain
information that is confidential, privileged, or exempt from disclosure
under applicable law and is intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee. This information is private and protected by law. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information in any
manner is strictly prohibited.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 12:39 PM Kristi Richards <Kristi at salishelderlaw.com>
wrote:

> Has anyone had DSHS send a Notice of Intent to File Estate Recovery Lien,
> post-death and against a single person? Then when you tell DSHS that it had
> proper creditor notice and failed to file a creditor claim, state something
> like, "Yes, a creditor claim would have been optimal. We missed that
> deadline because of staffing issues, but we still have the right to file
> the lien under Chapter 182-527 WAC. Feel free to object."?
>
> Objections are being submitted, but I would really love to know if anyone
> else has had it happen and any suggestions for good, better, best
> objections.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Kristi
>
>
>
> Kristi L. Richards
>
> (she, her)
>
>
> Attorney
>
>
> 51 W Dayton St. Suite 204
>
> Edmonds, WA 98020
>
> Main: (425) 492-7212
>
> *https://salishelderlaw.com/* <https://salishelderlaw.com/>
>
>
> *Providing Services in Elder Law and Estate Planning*
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
> of the original message
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of Eric Nelsen <
> eric at sayrelawoffices.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 22, 2026 9:55 AM
> *To:* ak at seattle-silvalaw.com <ak at seattle-silvalaw.com>; WSBA Probate &
> Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>; Joshua McKarcher <
> josh at mckarcherlaw.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBAPT] If a public notary prints their name, but does
> not sign their name, is that notary certification valid?
>
>
> Andrekita has the answer for her purposes...but I went down a rabbit hole.
>
>
>
> I didn’t know about the additional requirement for a notary signature—the
> notary requirement is at RCW 42.45.130(1)(b)
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__app.leg.wa.gov_RCW_default.aspx-3Fcite-3D42.45.130&d=DwMGaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=0MHrJbqypIIabHidarXCHJydIU_LTHNzxAyPFjz_SPw&m=CFWj8E0fHSdNRzQd6hjxs2Jsq31S1CizOG4k6VSTN36f0OXfkwZQUxZxUnEL8cZ0&s=vPuz8w5ikSh7M2uoRPOm7B4qGVJFR4lcaSuSM9eLA3o&e=>
> and WAC 308-30-100
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__app.leg.wa.gov_WAC_default.aspx-3Fcite-3D308-2D30-26full-3Dtrue-23308-2D30-2D100&d=DwMGaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=0MHrJbqypIIabHidarXCHJydIU_LTHNzxAyPFjz_SPw&m=CFWj8E0fHSdNRzQd6hjxs2Jsq31S1CizOG4k6VSTN36f0OXfkwZQUxZxUnEL8cZ0&s=JBb3-Ggozhlwyb4b6LW1VM3vO9XGXaHK5_9UP8Epmdc&e=>.
> Has to be signed “in the same manner as on file with the department” and
> “using the exact name that appears on the notary’s certificate of
> commission and their seal or stamp.”
>
>
>
> For practical purposes I can see that having a mismatch of the notary
> signature might cause a problem. But I question whether it could make the
> notarial act voidable. The cases tend to be strict about presence of the
> notary’s *seal* if an instrument conveying real property is involved, and
> of course the language of the notary’s certificate itself is critical in
> determining if it’s a proper acknowledgment or an oath or whatever; but
> with those caveats, minor defects in the notary’s formalities as written
> onto the document do not appear to invalidate the notarial act so long as
> there is proof that the notary did in fact perform their proper functions
> of verifying the identity of the signer and so forth.
>
>
>
> Compare:
>
> *State v. Epstein*, 138 Wash. 118 (1926), requiring dismissal of a
> criminal charge of perjury because the false instrument’s notary block was
> missing its seal, and therefore it wasn’t under oath under penalty of
> perjury
>
>
>
> *Melovitch v. City of Tacoma*, 135 Wash. 533 (1925), upholding validity
> of claim filed with City of Tacoma statute required that the claim must be
> verified under oath), where notary seal was missing but the claim was
> otherwise properly and timely filed and parol evidence was provided showing
> that the notarial acts had otherwise been correctly followed
>
>
>
> *Ben Holt Industries, Inc. v. Milne*, 36 Wn.App. 468 (1984), confirming
> signature of corporation landlord’s president and secretary that were
> acknowledged in individual capacity instead of representative capacity were
> fatally defective BUT the lease was upheld nevertheless based on part
> performance, stating, “The parties intended to create a lease. There is no
> uncertainty inherent here. Allowing a technical flaw in the acknowledgment
> to invalidate the lease does not prevent fraud or uncertainty, rather, it
> enhances it.”
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> Eric C. Nelsen
>
> Sayre Law Offices, PLLC
>
> 1417 31st Ave South
>
> Seattle WA 98144-3909
>
> 206-625-0092
>
> eric at sayrelawoffices.com
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Andrekita Silva
> *Sent:* Friday, June 19, 2026 3:30 PM
> *To:* Joshua McKarcher <josh at mckarcherlaw.com>
> *Cc:* WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBAPT] If a public notary prints their name, but does
> not sign their name, is that notary certification valid?
>
>
>
> Law Office of F. Andrekita Silva
> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> June 19, 2026
>
>
> Thank you all for your responses.
>
> I believe the statute clearly requires a signature.
>
>
>
> As Eric noted, it doesn't matter how or what a person signs, as long as
> it's that person's "signature."
>
> And as Joshua points out, it must be signed as the signature appears on
> his application which is on file with the State.
>
>
>
> At Melody's suggestion, I looked up this guy up on the State's website.
> There is no access to his application (I assume this could be secured if
> necessary for some process.) However, it looks like this guy became a
> notary for the very first time on March 23 !!  I'm thinking my client may
> have been this guy's first client and he choked...
>
>
>
> I asked my client to go get the revocation certified by someone else.
>
> Totally out of curiousity, I might email to Dept. of Licensing and ask if
> they'll send me a copy of this guys signature.
>
>
>
> Thanks again all!
>
>
> Andrekita Silva
> Law Office of F. Andrekita Silva
> 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 940
> Seattle, Washington 98101-2509
> 206-224-8288
> ak at seattle-silvalaw.com
>
>
> On 2026/06/19 08:17 AM, Joshua McKarcher wrote:
>
> Erick,
>
>  I agree with you about the common law signature, but I'm fairly
> certain if you get into the weeds of the notary public statutes and
> regulations and even the forms, it is a requirement (in each of Idaho
> and Washington) that a notary use the signature that they provide as
> the document or sample on their application.
>
>  For example, my application recites my full legal name as Joshua
> David McKarcher for purposes of first identifying me as a human being.
>
>
>  But then my notary NAME and SIGNATURE is only Joshua McKarcher. I
> must order my stamp to read THAT name, and I have to provide an
> exemplar of my notary signature in a box.
>
>  It is the case actually that if I suddenly began signing my name,
> _Joshua David McKarcher_, those notarial acts would become notorious
> (by which I mean naughty even if I'm behaving loosely with the
> meanings of words)!!!
>
>  The _Joshua David McKarcher _signatures would be noncompliant under
> the rules and regulations because that's not what is on file with the
> state or represented on my stamp.
>
>  (Of course the stamp name is irrelevant for signatures that look like
> line drawings of a person who can't be bothered. Then only the line
> drawing must match the signature on file with the state. )
>
>  There are saving regulations that say things like the instrument is
> not automatically invalid (void) only for these technical reasons. But
> that does not mean the act is not voidable and that someone could not
> challenge the act as invalid because it is noncompliant if they cared
> enough to obtain a court order to that effect.
>
>  Please forgive me for this email. Happy Friday! Best, Josh
>
>  Joshua McKarcher
>
>  _Attorney, Owner_
> McKarcher Law PLLC
> o: (509) 758-3345
> josh at mckarcherlaw.com
>
> -------------------------
>
> From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of Eric Nelsen
> <eric at sayrelawoffices.com>
> Sent: Thursday, 18 June 2026 09:11:06
> To: ak at seattle-silvalaw.com <ak at seattle-silvalaw.com>; WSBA Probate &
> Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] If a public notary prints their name, but does
> not sign their name, is that notary certification valid?
>
> Under common law a “signature” can be any kind of mark. It’s
> even allowable, for example, to sign “John Smith” as my
> idiosyncratic way of signing “Eric Nelsen.” The purpose of a
> signature is both instrumental (part of the act of notarizing) and
> evidentiary (notary was there and it was truly the notary and not
> somebody else). Any mark can meet both purposes.
>
> Marks that don’t bear some relationship to what people would expect
> to see as a signature, impairs the evidentiary function. Which is my
> longwinded and pompous way of agreeing with Melody—the problem
> isn’t that the printed signature is invalid, but that third parties
> might be inclined to distrust it.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Eric
>
> Eric C. Nelsen
>
> Sayre Law Offices, PLLC
>
> 1417 31st Ave South
>
> Seattle WA 98144-3909
>
> 206-625-0092
>
> eric at sayrelawoffices.com
>
> From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Andrekita Silva
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2026 12:52 AM
> To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
> Subject: [WSBAPT] If a public notary prints their name, but does not
> sign their name, is that notary certification valid?
>
> Law Office of F. Andrekita Silva
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> June 18, 2026
>
> Listserve,
>
> If a public notary prints his name, is that notary certification
> valid?
>
> RCW 42.45.130 says the certificate must be "signed and dated" in the
> same manner as is on file with the state.
>
> A client gave me a revocation to record. But, his name looks 100%
> printed. Some people tell me that my signature looks like I've
> printed, but it really is my cursive signature. I could not find a
> phone number for the notary to ask him if that is his signature or if
> he actually only printed his name and forgot to provide his signature.
>   I've emailed to my client to ask for this guy's phone number. I'm
> going to try to check with this guy to see if that's his signature or
> if he printed.
>
> But, what do you all think?  Will this revocation need to be
> re-executed?
>
> Andrekita Silva
> Law Office of F. Andrekita Silva
> 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 940
> Seattle, Washington 98101-2509
> 206-224-8288
> ak at seattle-silvalaw.com
>
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
> _______________________________________________
> WSBAPT mailing list
> WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20260626/eae94463/attachment.html>