[WSBARP] Fence Encroachment

[Carmen Rowe]

On the question of fence encroachment, my understanding is that your
neighbor is not claiming property/there is no boundary line agreement, he
is just agreeing to remove the encroaching fence, and affirming that your
client is sole owner of the property, correct? My comments below are
premised on that reading.

You don't need a QCD if the fence has been there less than 10 years.
Otherwise, technically, title to the property has transferred as a matter
of law to the adverse party (even if nothing on title) after 10 years. I
think recording a voluntary agreement releasing any AP claim is sufficient
to avoid future issues, especially if you put binding on successors and
assigns; but in some minds a QCD is the formally appropriate resolution.

If that's what is executed, I think you just note that this affirms
ownership (looking at it rather like a potential co-tenant spouse signing
off to the other to release any community property interest)

If there is a transfer of title, though, such as a boundary line
adjustment, Bryce is correct that you will need a sign-off from any
mortgage company who has a DOT (or really any other party with lien rights)
preceding the adjustment (using the 10 year trigger, not just when you
record), as their interest is first in time. They usually agree as it
cleans up title and does not impact the value (presuming minimal land is
taken). The resolution is often a partial assignment, the mortgagee has to
pay for their attorney fees for the work to execute it. They usually have
an internal set process.

(my apologies for not including the original commentary, I have digest so
it's a bit messy …)


Carmen Rowe, Attorney/Owner


Phone: (360) 669-3576 (direct cell)
Email:  Carmen at GryphonLawGroup.com

*Mailing address: *1673 S. Market Blvd. #202, Chehalis, WA 98532
*Olympia/Lacey office: *1415 College Street SE, Lacey, WA 98503
*Seattle office: *1001 4th Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, WA 98154


*We also offer virtual meeting options, and are often available to meet
with you in an alternate location convenient to you.*

*Privileged and confidential: *This message is confidential. If you receive
this message in error, please let us know, and please delete and disregard
any information it contains. We thank you for your respect in not sharing
this email with anyone.

If we are communicating with you regarding a debt or monies owed, THIS MAY
BE AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT, AND ANY INFORMATION WILL BE USED FOR THAT
PURPOSE. You have the right to seek legal advice from an attorney. To the
extent that the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act applies, this
firm is acting as a debt collector for the firm's client named above. Any
information obtained will be used for collection purposes.


On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 12:01 PM <wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com> wrote:

> Send WSBARP mailing list submissions to
>         wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WSBARP digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: WSBARP Digest, Vol 58, Issue 9 (Stephen Whitehouse)
>    2. Recommendation (Bryce Dille)
>    3. Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
>       (Julie Martiniello)
>    4. Re: Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
>       (Bryce Dille)
>    5. Re: Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
>       (nestor at pplsweb.com)
>    6. Re: Fence Encroachment (nestor at pplsweb.com)
>    7. Re: Recommendation (Kim Sandher)
>    8. Re: Fence Encroachment (nestor at pplsweb.com)
>    9. 1031 Exchange of Vacation or secondary Home (nestor at pplsweb.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:15:17 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Stephen Whitehouse <swhite8893 at aol.com>
> To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] WSBARP Digest, Vol 58, Issue 9
> Message-ID: <1560291838.546279.1562872517380 at mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Nestor,? ? ? ?I would draft a quit claim deed for the encroacher to sign,
> the legal being the entirety of your clients' property for purposes of
> clearing title. I would then do a license for your client to sign
> referencing an existing fence proximate to the line with an expiration
> date. The neighbor is being cooperative, so I would keep it at that level.
> I would then record both, the QCD first.
> Steve
>
> Stephen WhitehouseWhitehouse & Nichols, LLPP.O. Box 1273601 W. Railroad
> Ave.Shelton, Wa. 98584360-426-5885
> swhite8893 at aol.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wsbarp-request <wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> To: wsbarp <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Sent: Thu, Jul 11, 2019 12:00 pm
> Subject: WSBARP Digest, Vol 58, Issue 9
>
> Send WSBARP mailing list submissions to
> ??? wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> ??? http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ??? wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ??? wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WSBARP digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> ? 1. Re: Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure under
> ? ? ? RCW 18.27.114? (David Faber)
> ? 2. RR ROW (Chris B)
> ? 3. Re: RR ROW (Gregory L. Ursich)
> ? 4. Re: RR ROW (Chris B)
> ? 5. Re: Lien rights: Curing failure to provide??? disclosure??? under
> ? ? ? RCW 18.27.114? (Rick Hoss)
> ? 6. Re: RR ROW (michael at westseattleattorney.com)
> ? 7. Referral, please: Unexpected foreclosure of 2nd (Craig Blackmon)
> ? 8. Re: Referral, please: Unexpected foreclosure of 2nd (Kate Love)
> ? 9. Re: Lien rights: Curing failure to??? provide??? disclosure??? under
> ? ? ? RCW 18.27.114? (Jeff Davis)
> ? 10. Fence Encroachment (nestor at pplsweb.com)
> ? 11. Re: Fence Encroachment (Bryce Dille)
> ? 12. Re: Fence Encroachment (Gregory L. Ursich)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 12:09:36 -0700
> From: David Faber <david at faberfeinson.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide
> ??? disclosure under RCW 18.27.114?
> Message-ID:
> ??? <CAKkD=wgEcCE=ZvKd5a16B0XppRm07yoxhRUajSvPdNPZori3nQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Great, thank you for the affirmation, Daniel!
>
> Best,
> David J. Faber
> Faber Feinson PLLC
> 210 Polk Street, Suite 1
> Port Townsend, WA 98368
> (360) 379-4110
>
> *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
> This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
> you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
> copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
> please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in
> error, and destroy the copy you received.***
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:40 AM Daniel Berner <
> dberner at phillipsburgesslaw.com> wrote:
>
> > David,
> >
> >
> > Yes, failure to provide the notice to customer document is a fatal flaw
> to
> > a lien claim unless one of the exceptions found in RCW 18.27.114 applies.
> >
> >
> > Further, if a claim of lien is recorded without providing the notice to
> > customer document, then the lien claimant is susceptible to a frivolous
> > lien motion and also constitutes a per se violation of the consumer
> > protection act which both allow for an award of attorney fees and costs.
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Daniel Berner
> > ------------------------------
> > *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> > wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of David Faber <
> > david at faberfeinson.com>
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:14:41 AM
> > *To:* wsbarp
> > *Subject:* [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure
> > under RCW 18.27.114?
> >
> > There is no way to cure the failure to provide a disclosure under RCW
> > 18.27.114 and to recover the right to file a lien under RCW 60.04 after
> > work has commenced, correct? Reviewing the statute and A.W.R. Constr.,
> Inc.
> > v. L&I, 152 Wn.App. 479 appears dispositive: if the job does not fall
> into
> > one of the exceptions for disclosure under 18.27.114, the failure to
> > provide a disclosure constitutes a loss of the right to lien by a
> > contractor full stop, but I want to make absolutely certain that I'm not
> > mistaken in my read of the statute and case law on point.
> >
> > Best,
> > David J. Faber
> > Faber Feinson PLLC
> > 210 Polk Street, Suite 1
> > Port Townsend, WA 98368
> > (360) 379-4110
> >
> > *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
> > This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
> > information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
> > you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
> > copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
> > please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication
> in
> > error, and destroy the copy you received.***
> > ***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.***
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WSBARP mailing list
> > WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> > http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/e3371362/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 20:19:58 +0000
> From: Chris B <chrisb at heckerwakefield.com>
> To: "wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] RR ROW
> Message-ID:
> ???
> <1BA41B3255EE974D92CD63CA41B8DA9801104804 at HWFMAIL2.HeckerWakefield.local>
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I have a client whose property encroaches onto an old RR right of way (by
> which I mean improvements including pavement and a retaining wall).? I've
> quickly looked at some old cases that seem to indicate that one can't
> adversely possess part of a RR ROW.? Does anyone have a contrary view?? The
> cases I've looked at are about 100 years old.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Chris Benis
> Hecker, Wakefield & Feilberg, P.S.
> 321 First Avenue, Seattle, WA? 98199
> 206.447-1900 office - 206.447.9075 fax - heckerwakefield.com<
> http://harrison-benis.com/>
> This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND
> PRIVILEGED.? Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the
> addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any
> information contained in the message.? If you have received the message in
> error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb at heckerwakefield.com
> <mailto:chrisb at heckerwakefield.com>, and delete this message. Thank you
> very much.
> To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if
> it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written
> to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties
> that may be imposed under federal tax law.? Under recent IRS rules, a
> taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties
> only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that
> conforms to stringent requirements under federal law.? Please contact me if
> you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to
> these new rules.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/8a792a08/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 21:00:54 +0000
> From: "Gregory L. Ursich" <gursich at insleebest.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] RR ROW
> Message-ID:
> ??? <
> DM5PR17MB1628CF85A7F044DA97F40128DCF00 at DM5PR17MB1628.namprd17.prod.outlook.com
> >
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Chris: A lot of those old railroad right of ways contain reversionary
> language to the original grantor (presumably your client is a successor)
> when it ceases to be used as a railroad.? If that is not the case; I would
> try to figure out which railroad currently holds the rights and contact
> them directly to negotiate a resolution.? A guy named Stephen Graddon, who
> I think is located in South King County, does historical research on
> railroad titles and he may be able to assist.
>
> [ibdr2]
> Gregory L. Ursich | Shareholder
> Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
> P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
> vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<
> http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:
> gursich at insleebest.com>
> This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is
> intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed.? If you
> have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to
> the sender.? Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the
> attorney-client or any other privilege.
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Chris B
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 1:20 PM
> To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
> Subject: [WSBARP] RR ROW
>
> I have a client whose property encroaches onto an old RR right of way (by
> which I mean improvements including pavement and a retaining wall).? I've
> quickly looked at some old cases that seem to indicate that one can't
> adversely possess part of a RR ROW.? Does anyone have a contrary view?? The
> cases I've looked at are about 100 years old.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Chris Benis
> Hecker, Wakefield & Feilberg, P.S.
> 321 First Avenue, Seattle, WA? 98199
> 206.447-1900 office - 206.447.9075 fax - heckerwakefield.com<
> http://harrison-benis.com/>
>
> This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND
> PRIVILEGED.? Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the
> addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any
> information contained in the message.? If you have received the message in
> error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb at heckerwakefield.com
> <mailto:chrisb at heckerwakefield.com>, and delete this message. Thank you
> very much.
>
> To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if
> it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written
> to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties
> that may be imposed under federal tax law.? Under recent IRS rules, a
> taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties
> only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that
> conforms to stringent requirements under federal law.? Please contact me if
> you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to
> these new rules.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/2dfa32e1/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 2843 bytes
> Desc: image001.jpg
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/2dfa32e1/image001-0001.jpg
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 21:06:54 +0000
> From: Chris B <chrisb at heckerwakefield.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] RR ROW
> Message-ID:
> ???
> <1BA41B3255EE974D92CD63CA41B8DA9801104B10 at HWFMAIL2.HeckerWakefield.local>
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Thanks Greg, Good to hear from you. I saw your name on the letterhead at
> IB!
>
> CTB
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Gregory L. Ursich
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 2:01 PM
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] RR ROW
>
> Chris: A lot of those old railroad right of ways contain reversionary
> language to the original grantor (presumably your client is a successor)
> when it ceases to be used as a railroad.? If that is not the case; I would
> try to figure out which railroad currently holds the rights and contact
> them directly to negotiate a resolution.? A guy named Stephen Graddon, who
> I think is located in South King County, does historical research on
> railroad titles and he may be able to assist.
>
> [ibdr2]
>
> Gregory L. Ursich | Shareholder
> Skyline Tower, Suite 1500 | 10900 NE 4th Street | Bellevue, WA 98004
> P: 425.450.4258 | F: 425.635.7720
> vCard<http://www.insleebest.com/uploads/vcards/gursich.vcf> | website<
> http://www.insleebest.com/> | gursich at insleebest.com<mailto:
> gursich at insleebest.com>
>
> This electronic mail transmission is privileged and confidential and is
> intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed.? If you
> have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to
> the sender.? Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of the
> attorney-client or any other privilege.
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Chris B
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 1:20 PM
> To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] RR ROW
>
> I have a client whose property encroaches onto an old RR right of way (by
> which I mean improvements including pavement and a retaining wall).? I've
> quickly looked at some old cases that seem to indicate that one can't
> adversely possess part of a RR ROW.? Does anyone have a contrary view?? The
> cases I've looked at are about 100 years old.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Chris Benis
> Hecker, Wakefield & Feilberg, P.S.
> 321 First Avenue, Seattle, WA? 98199
> 206.447-1900 office - 206.447.9075 fax - heckerwakefield.com<
> http://harrison-benis.com/>
>
> This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND
> PRIVILEGED.? Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the
> addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any
> information contained in the message.? If you have received the message in
> error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb at heckerwakefield.com
> <mailto:chrisb at heckerwakefield.com>, and delete this message. Thank you
> very much.
>
> To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if
> it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written
> to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties
> that may be imposed under federal tax law.? Under recent IRS rules, a
> taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties
> only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that
> conforms to stringent requirements under federal law.? Please contact me if
> you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to
> these new rules.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/4317f665/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 2843 bytes
> Desc: image001.jpg
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/4317f665/image001-0001.jpg
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 14:12:18 -0700
> From: "Rick Hoss" <rhoss at hctc.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide
> ??? disclosure??? under??? RCW 18.27.114?
> Message-ID: <004d01d53764$27dfbfd0$779f3f70$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Daniel is right as usual. If someone calls, the area L&I construction
> compliance inspector will issue the contractor a $500 infraction citation
> for a violation of the RCW 18.27.114 Notice to Customer. Smart contractors
> put this Notice right in their contracts, together with the RCW 64.50
> Notice
> of Claim that requires 45 days notice and opportunity to cure before a
> lawsuit can be filed. So your contractor client may not be able to file a
> lien but you can still help improve their contract forms.
>
>
>
> Even with lien rights preserved first check the property title to make sure
> any lien position is economically viable. Smart suppliers and builders
> document the earliest start work or start delivering material dates to
> improve their lien position in the event it becomes necessary. So your
> contractor can use new forms and new procedures to improve its position for
> future projects and foreclosing the lien is required. One area building
> supplier documents delivery of a few sticks of lumber to the project site
> long before the material package is delivered - liens relate back to date
> of
> first delivery or first work.
>
>
> RCW 18.27.350 <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=18.27.350>
> Violations-Consumer Protection Act.
>
>
> The consumers of this state have a right to be protected from unfair or
> deceptive acts or practices when they enter into contracts with
> contractors.
> The fact that a contractor is found to have committed a misdemeanor or
> infraction under this chapter shall be deemed to affect the public interest
> and shall constitute a violation of chapter 19.86
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=19.86>? RCW. The surety bond
> shall not be liable for monetary penalties or violations of chapter 19.86
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=19.86>? RCW.
>
>
>
>
> See also RCW 18.27.005
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=18.27.005>? Strict
> enforcement.
>
>
> This chapter shall be strictly enforced. Therefore, the doctrine of
> substantial compliance shall not be used by the department in the
> application and construction of this chapter. Anyone engaged in the
> activities of a contractor is presumed to know the requirements of this
> chapter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Berner
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:38 AM
> To: wsbarp
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure
> under RCW 18.27.114?
>
>
>
> David,
>
>
>
> Yes, failure to provide the notice to customer document is a fatal flaw to
> a
> lien claim unless one of the exceptions found in RCW 18.27.114 applies.
>
>
>
> Further, if a claim of lien is recorded without providing the notice to
> customer document, then the lien claimant is susceptible to a frivolous
> lien
> motion and also constitutes a per se violation of the consumer protection
> act which both allow for an award of attorney fees and costs.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel Berner
>
> ? _____?
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> >
> on behalf of David Faber <david at faberfeinson.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:14:41 AM
> To: wsbarp
> Subject: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure under
> RCW 18.27.114?
>
>
>
> There is no way to cure the failure to provide a disclosure under RCW
> 18.27.114 and to recover the right to file a lien under RCW 60.04 after
> work
> has commenced, correct? Reviewing the statute and A.W.R. Constr., Inc. v.
> L&I, 152 Wn.App. 479 appears dispositive: if the job does not fall into one
> of the exceptions for disclosure under 18.27.114, the failure to provide a
> disclosure constitutes a loss of the right to lien by a contractor full
> stop, but I want to make absolutely certain that I'm not mistaken in my
> read
> of the statute and case law on point.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> David J. Faber
>
> Faber Feinson PLLC
>
> 210 Polk Street, Suite 1
>
> Port Townsend, WA 98368
> (360) 379-4110
>
>
>
> *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.?
> This
> communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If
> you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you have received this
> communication in error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate,
> or otherwise use the information. Also, please indicate to the sender that
> you have received this communication in error, and destroy the copy you
> received.***
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/a74ddb59/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 14:16:49 -0700
> From: <michael at westseattleattorney.com>
> To: "WSBA Real Property Listserv" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] RR ROW
> Message-ID:
> ??? <
> 20190710141649.c4dc0bb2a322ec24c6317f4bf97284a6.700c62ede8.wbe at email21.godaddy.com
> >
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/d515c9d1/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: sigimg0
> Type: image/png
> Size: 51981 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/d515c9d1/sigimg0-0001.png
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:11:58 -0700
> From: Craig Blackmon <craig at lawofficeofcraigblackmon.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property List Serve <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Referral, please: Unexpected foreclosure of 2nd
> Message-ID:
> ??? <CAG1D8uYCMFK+rkMrve6YrjDSxOrdOo7ug70yw5qp-K0EhvaSbA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 'Mates, PC called with matter outside my scope. Nine years ago they filed
> Chapter 7. At that time they thought this also resolved the second mortgage
> on their home. Of course, no such luck. Yesterday they receive a notice of
> intent to foreclose. Debt is about $120k, a substantial sum. BK attorney
> has retired to HI.
>
> I believe they need someone to at least spend a little time counseling them
> about their options -- and I already prep'ed him, likely none of them are
> very good. But given the amount at issue....
>
> I will forward all names. Thanks.
>
> Craig
> Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
> Seattle Real Estate Lawyer <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
> 92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
> Seattle WA 98121
> Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949? Fax: (206) 770-7328
> @LawyerBroker <https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
> How to Buy Without an Agent
> <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent>
> | How
> to Sell FSBO <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO
> >
>  | RE Glossary
> <http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential
> electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use
> of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended
> recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged
> nature.? Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If
> you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all
> copies.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/7014b645/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 22:32:25 +0000
> From: Kate Love <KateL at law-hawks.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Referral, please: Unexpected foreclosure of 2nd
> Message-ID:
> ??? <
> DM5PR16MB14680ED5ED25420E05685138F3F00 at DM5PR16MB1468.namprd16.prod.outlook.com
> >
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Craig,? I worked with foreclosures, mortgage & collections for a number
> of years and have advised quite a few clients on issues like this one.?
> Thanks,? Kate
>
>
> Kate F. Love
> WSBA No. 51314
> Hawkes Law Firm P.S.
> main line 206 367 5000
> fax line? ? 206 367 4005
> katel at law-hawks.com<mailto:katel at law-hawks.com>
> www.hawkeslawcenter.com<http://www.hawkeslawcenter.com/>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of Craig Blackmon
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 3:12 PM
> To: WSBA Real Property List Serve <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Referral, please: Unexpected foreclosure of 2nd
>
> 'Mates, PC called with matter outside my scope. Nine years ago they filed
> Chapter 7. At that time they thought this also resolved the second mortgage
> on their home. Of course, no such luck. Yesterday they receive a notice of
> intent to foreclose. Debt is about $120k, a substantial sum. BK attorney
> has retired to HI.
>
> I believe they need someone to at least spend a little time counseling
> them about their options -- and I already prep'ed him, likely none of them
> are very good. But given the amount at issue....
>
> I will forward all names. Thanks.
>
> Craig
> Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law
> Seattle Real Estate Lawyer<http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/>
> 92 Lenora St. (The Makers Space, a shared work environment)
> Seattle WA 98121
> Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949? Fax: (206) 770-7328
> @LawyerBroker<https://twitter.com/LawyerBroker>
> How to Buy Without an Agent<
> http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Buy+without+an+Agent>
> | How to Sell FSBO<
> http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Sell+FSBO> | RE
> Glossary<
> http://www.seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog?category=Real+Estate+Glossary>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential
> electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use
> of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended
> recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged
> nature.? Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If
> you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all
> copies.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/31b135b3/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:48:54 -0700
> From: "Jeff Davis" <jeff at bellanddavispllc.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to??? provide
> ??? disclosure??? under??? RCW 18.27.114?
> Message-ID: <00a601d53771$a72e9e20$f58bda60$@bellanddavispllc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> This is a good discussion as I have seen more claims against contractors
> for
> not providing the required notices, even though I do not see where the home
> owners have been damaged when the notices are not given, especially under
> RCW 18.27.114 as the contractor can't lien.? In discussing RCW 18.27.350,
> Division III ruled "this language requires a determination in a prior
> criminal prosecution or infraction proceeding before it can be asserted as
> a
> per se CPA violation.? Taylor v. Calene, No. 31917-2-III (Wn. App. January
> 29, 2019).? I have? not had a contractor client cited by L & I but,
> finally,
> with this and other cases, the contractors are finally starting to
> incorporate the required notices.?
>
>
>
> Jeff Davis
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> >
> On Behalf Of Rick Hoss
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 2:12 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure
> under RCW 18.27.114?
>
>
>
> Daniel is right as usual. If someone calls, the area L&I construction
> compliance inspector will issue the contractor a $500 infraction citation
> for a violation of the RCW 18.27.114 Notice to Customer. Smart contractors
> put this Notice right in their contracts, together with the RCW 64.50
> Notice
> of Claim that requires 45 days notice and opportunity to cure before a
> lawsuit can be filed. So your contractor client may not be able to file a
> lien but you can still help improve their contract forms.
>
>
>
> Even with lien rights preserved first check the property title to make sure
> any lien position is economically viable. Smart suppliers and builders
> document the earliest start work or start delivering material dates to
> improve their lien position in the event it becomes necessary. So your
> contractor can use new forms and new procedures to improve its position for
> future projects and foreclosing the lien is required. One area building
> supplier documents delivery of a few sticks of lumber to the project site
> long before the material package is delivered - liens relate back to date
> of
> first delivery or first work.
>
>
> RCW 18.27.350 <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=18.27.350>
> Violations-Consumer Protection Act.
>
>
> The consumers of this state have a right to be protected from unfair or
> deceptive acts or practices when they enter into contracts with
> contractors.
> The fact that a contractor is found to have committed a misdemeanor or
> infraction under this chapter shall be deemed to affect the public interest
> and shall constitute a violation of chapter 19.86
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=19.86>? RCW. The surety bond
> shall not be liable for monetary penalties or violations of chapter 19.86
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=19.86>? RCW.
>
>
>
>
> See also RCW 18.27.005
> <http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=18.27.005>? Strict
> enforcement.
>
>
> This chapter shall be strictly enforced. Therefore, the doctrine of
> substantial compliance shall not be used by the department in the
> application and construction of this chapter. Anyone engaged in the
> activities of a contractor is presumed to know the requirements of this
> chapter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Berner
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:38 AM
> To: wsbarp
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure
> under RCW 18.27.114?
>
>
>
> David,
>
>
>
> Yes, failure to provide the notice to customer document is a fatal flaw to
> a
> lien claim unless one of the exceptions found in RCW 18.27.114 applies.
>
>
>
> Further, if a claim of lien is recorded without providing the notice to
> customer document, then the lien claimant is susceptible to a frivolous
> lien
> motion and also constitutes a per se violation of the consumer protection
> act which both allow for an award of attorney fees and costs.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel Berner
>
> ? _____?
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > on behalf of David Faber
> <david at faberfeinson.com <mailto:david at faberfeinson.com> >
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 11:14:41 AM
> To: wsbarp
> Subject: [WSBARP] Lien rights: Curing failure to provide disclosure under
> RCW 18.27.114?
>
>
>
> There is no way to cure the failure to provide a disclosure under RCW
> 18.27.114 and to recover the right to file a lien under RCW 60.04 after
> work
> has commenced, correct? Reviewing the statute and A.W.R. Constr., Inc. v.
> L&I, 152 Wn.App. 479 appears dispositive: if the job does not fall into one
> of the exceptions for disclosure under 18.27.114, the failure to provide a
> disclosure constitutes a loss of the right to lien by a contractor full
> stop, but I want to make absolutely certain that I'm not mistaken in my
> read
> of the statute and case law on point.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> David J. Faber
>
> Faber Feinson PLLC
>
> 210 Polk Street, Suite 1
>
> Port Townsend, WA 98368
> (360) 379-4110
>
>
>
> *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.?
> This
> communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If
> you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you have received this
> communication in error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate,
> or otherwise use the information. Also, please indicate to the sender that
> you have received this communication in error, and destroy the copy you
> received.***
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/09d9d316/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 19:40:25 -0700
> From: <nestor at pplsweb.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
> Message-ID: <003901d53792$1d95ff20$58c1fd60$@pplsweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> PC's neighbor has an old fence that has been over the PC's property line
> for
> some time. They amicably agreed that neighbor will remove old fence and
> build a new fence inside neighbors property. I want to draft an agreement
> attaching a recent survey as an exhibit and record the same, where neighbor
> agrees to remove fence and neighbor has license to maintain fence
> temporarily and thereafter remove the same, and further where neighbor
> releases and quitclaims any right to PC's property.
>
>
>
> I don't want to call it a Boundary Line Agreement, since we don't want to
> go
> the route of having the surveyor record the Survey and its definitely not a
> BL Adjustment.
>
>
>
> Can I simply record such an "Agreement" and attach a survey without any
> complications from the recording office?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard
> copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you
> have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return
> e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and delete this
> message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded
> message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of
> this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/34f081a3/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 16:00:46 +0000
> From: Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
> Message-ID:
> ??? <
> MWHPR11MB1311E2EEA35A254D29C49F28C8F30 at MWHPR11MB1311.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
> >
> ???
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> The only way you can do it so it is recognized by the county as a proper
> division is under RCW 58.04.007 also see if property to be conveyed is
> subject to mortgage or deed of trust other wise the new parcel will be
> partially encumbered until it is released also see if there is a judgment
> lien against the conveyed parcel so need a title report.
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
> Dille Law, PLLC
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
> Olympia, Washington 98502
> www.dillelaw.com<http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).? If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
> Business, Government and Tax Law
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of nestor at pplsweb.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:40 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
> PC's neighbor has an old fence that has been over the PC's property line
> for some time. They amicably agreed that neighbor will remove old fence and
> build a new fence inside neighbors property. I want to draft an agreement
> attaching a recent survey as an exhibit and record the same, where neighbor
> agrees to remove fence and neighbor has license to maintain fence
> temporarily and thereafter remove the same, and further where neighbor
> releases and quitclaims any right to PC's property.
>
> I don't want to call it a Boundary Line Agreement, since we don't want to
> go the route of having the surveyor record the Survey and its definitely
> not a BL Adjustment.
>
> Can I simply record such an "Agreement" and attach a survey without any
> complications from the recording office?
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/b71dd08d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 16:37:46 +0000
> From: "Gregory L. Ursich" <gursich at insleebest.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
> Message-ID: <B36E34C0-6C77-48FF-86DD-535F5EFD63AB at insleebest.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I wouldn?t record that kind of Agreement. I would have a written private
> settlement and set a date certain by which neighbors agree to remove and
> relocate fence, and when the fence is moved have the survey revised to
> reflect fence is located on the boundary or on neighboring property. Then
> record the revised survey. You can incentivized the neighbors to act
> quickly by either offering them $500 to comply timely with the agreement,
> or have a liquidated damages clause where they pay a $1000 penalty if the
> fence is not removed in time. Also include an attorney fees clause and make
> agreement enforceable in a subsequent court action if they do not comply.
> You can also include a term for them to separately sign a quit claim deed
> to your clients property, given in consideration to resolve a boundary
> dispute, and record that right away as soon as they sign the deed and
> settlement agreement. -Greg Ursich, Inslee Best 425-455-1234
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:07 AM, Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com<mailto:
> Bryce at dillelaw.com>> wrote:
>
> The only way you can do it so it is recognized by the county as a proper
> division is under RCW 58.04.007 also see if property to be conveyed is
> subject to mortgage or deed of trust other wise the new parcel will be
> partially encumbered until it is released also see if there is a judgment
> lien against the conveyed parcel so need a title report.
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
> Dille Law, PLLC
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
> Olympia, Washington 98502
> www.dillelaw.com<http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).? If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
> Business, Government and Tax Law
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> On Behalf Of
> nestor at pplsweb.com<mailto:nestor at pplsweb.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:40 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:
> wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
> PC?s neighbor has an old fence that has been over the PC?s property line
> for some time. They amicably agreed that neighbor will remove old fence and
> build a new fence inside neighbors property. I want to draft an agreement
> attaching a recent survey as an exhibit and record the same, where neighbor
> agrees to remove fence and neighbor has license to maintain fence
> temporarily and thereafter remove the same, and further where neighbor
> releases and quitclaims any right to PC?s property.
>
> I don?t want to call it a Boundary Line Agreement, since we don?t want to
> go the route of having the surveyor record the Survey and its definitely
> not a BL Adjustment.
>
> Can I simply record such an ?Agreement? and attach a survey without any
> complications from the recording office?
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
> ***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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/9ea54cf7/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ***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.***
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> End of WSBARP Digest, Vol 58, Issue 9
> *************************************
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/8a7e3d62/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 20:25:09 +0000
> From: Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Recommendation
> Message-ID:
>         <
> MWHPR11MB1311428E318EE7E98AD650B0C8F30 at MWHPR11MB1311.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Need referral for client involved in a dissolution action in Yakima very
> substantial assets involved any recommendations would be appreciated thanks
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
> Dille Law, PLLC
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
> Olympia, Washington 98502
> www.dillelaw.com<http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
> Business, Government and Tax Law
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/7ba0a5c6/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:29:26 -0700
> From: Julie Martiniello <julie at dimensionlaw.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CALvnKH-dvpfSWPmKSrOzbceKOPr6DprPfvpiFy5zsYzg59HG8g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a client that is going to lease a property to a tenant that will be
> operating an adult family home in the property. He wants to do this a
> commercial NNN lease. My question is this: Since he know it is going to be
> used for residential purposes, must this be a residential lease in which
> RCW 59.18 would apply, or since he is leasing it to a business for its own
> business purposes do the duties imposed under 59.18 not apply to the owner?
>
> Thanks in advance for any input!
>
> --
> Respectfully,
>
> JULIE A. MARTINIELLO | PARTNER | DIMENSION LAW GROUP PLLC
> 130 Andover Park East, Suite 300 | Tukwila, WA 98188
> t: *206.973.3500 *| f: *206.577.5090*| e: JULIE*@dimensionlaw.com*|
> www.dimensionlaw.com
>
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received
> this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or
> telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy
> all paper and electronic copies.
>
> --
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:??This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the
> intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to
> intercept
> this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic
> Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines,
> imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone;
> return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper
> and electronic copies.?Any settlement offer contained herein is made
> pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on
> the part of this firm?s client(s) or its agents.??IRS?CIRCULAR?230
> DISCLAIMER:??To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, I
> inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this communication
> (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and
> cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the
> Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/fce51148/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 22:48:46 +0000
> From: Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v
>         Residential
> Message-ID:
>         <
> MWHPR11MB131107BBC43390A9DD6EA9A3C8F30 at MWHPR11MB1311.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Isn?t it exempt under RCW 59.18.040(1)
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
> Dille Law, PLLC
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
> Olympia, Washington 98502
> www.dillelaw.com<http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
> Business, Government and Tax Law
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of Julie Martiniello
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:29 PM
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
>
> Hello All,
>
> I have a client that is going to lease a property to a tenant that will be
> operating an adult family home in the property. He wants to do this a
> commercial NNN lease. My question is this: Since he know it is going to be
> used for residential purposes, must this be a residential lease in which
> RCW 59.18 would apply, or since he is leasing it to a business for its own
> business purposes do the duties imposed under 59.18 not apply to the owner?
>
> Thanks in advance for any input!
>
> --
> Respectfully,
>
> JULIE A. MARTINIELLO | PARTNER | DIMENSION LAW GROUP PLLC
> 130 Andover Park East, Suite 300 | Tukwila, WA 98188
> t: 206.973.3500 | f: 206.577.5090| e: JULIE at dimensionlaw.com|<mailto:
> JULIE at dimensionlaw.com|> www.dimensionlaw.com<http://www.dimensionlaw.com/
> >
>
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received
> this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or
> telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy
> all paper and electronic copies.
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to intercept
> this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic
> Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines,
> imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone;
> return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper
> and electronic copies. Any settlement offer contained herein is made
> pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on
> the part of this firm?s client(s) or its agents.  IRS C!
>  IRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:  To ensure compliance with requirements imposed
> by the IRS, I inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
> communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be
> used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under
> the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/99d2471a/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:56:53 -0700
> From: <nestor at pplsweb.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v
>         Residential
> Message-ID: <013501d5383c$08add1a0$1a0974e0$@pplsweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> This is commercial purposes. The first step is insuring that the City or
> Town allows this use  or if the property is zoned for this  use. I would
> make the lease contingent on Tenant obtaining all licenses and approvals,
> before allowing the business to operate.
>
>
>
> Keep in mind that this use or operation has a high risk of liability to
> the operator and your client as landlord should be adequately and
> sufficiently covered for the liability or acts of the operator. For
> example, keep in mind that it is common for elderly people to fall and
> typically the family members will go all out against the operator AND the
> property owner if possible.
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of Julie Martiniello
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:29 PM
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Adult Family Home Lease- Commercial v Residential
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> I have a client that is going to lease a property to a tenant that will be
> operating an adult family home in the property. He wants to do this a
> commercial NNN lease. My question is this: Since he know it is going to be
> used for residential purposes, must this be a residential lease in which
> RCW 59.18 would apply, or since he is leasing it to a business for its own
> business purposes do the duties imposed under 59.18 not apply to the owner?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any input!
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
> JULIE A. MARTINIELLO | PARTNER | DIMENSION LAW GROUP PLLC
> 130 Andover Park East, Suite 300 | Tukwila, WA 98188
>
> t: 206.973.3500 | f: 206.577.5090| e: JULIE <mailto:JULIE at dimensionlaw.com|>
> @dimensionlaw.com|  <http://www.dimensionlaw.com/> www.dimensionlaw.com
>
>
>
>
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received
> this e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or
> telephone; return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy
> all paper and electronic copies.
>
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This e-mail (including any attachments) is
> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may
> contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the
> intended recipient, you are notified that any review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. Attempts to intercept
> this message are in violation of 18 USC 2511(1) of the Electronic
> Communications Privacy Act, which subjects the interceptor to fines,
> imprisonment and/or civil damages. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please immediately notify us by e-mail, facsimile, or telephone;
> return the e-mail to us at the e-mail address below; and destroy all paper
> and electronic copies. Any settlement offer contained herein is made
> pursuant to Washington ER 408, and without admitting fault or liability on
> the part of this firm?s client(s) or its agents.  IRS C!
>  IRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:  To ensure compliance with requirements imposed
> by the IRS, I inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
> communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be
> used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under
> the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/3221c053/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 18:24:30 -0700
> From: <nestor at pplsweb.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
> Message-ID: <01d701d53850$a9042d20$fb0c8760$@pplsweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Great ideas. Since there is no money changing hands would exemption under
> WAC 458-61A-215 (1) apply and for reasons we state ?Clear upon any issue
> regarding adverse possession?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of Gregory L. Ursich
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 9:38 AM
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
>
>
> I wouldn?t record that kind of Agreement. I would have a written private
> settlement and set a date certain by which neighbors agree to remove and
> relocate fence, and when the fence is moved have the survey revised to
> reflect fence is located on the boundary or on neighboring property. Then
> record the revised survey. You can incentivized the neighbors to act
> quickly by either offering them $500 to comply timely with the agreement,
> or have a liquidated damages clause where they pay a $1000 penalty if the
> fence is not removed in time. Also include an attorney fees clause and make
> agreement enforceable in a subsequent court action if they do not comply.
> You can also include a term for them to separately sign a quit claim deed
> to your clients property, given in consideration to resolve a boundary
> dispute, and record that right away as soon as they sign the deed and
> settlement agreement. -Greg Ursich, Inslee Best 425-455-1234
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:07 AM, Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com <mailto:
> Bryce at dillelaw.com> > wrote:
>
> The only way you can do it so it is recognized by the county as a proper
> division is under RCW 58.04.007 also see if property to be conveyed is
> subject to mortgage or deed of trust other wise the new parcel will be
> partially encumbered until it is released also see if there is a judgment
> lien against the conveyed parcel so need a title report.
>
>
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
>
> Dille Law, PLLC
>
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
>
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
>
> Olympia, Washington 98502
>
> www.dillelaw.com <http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender
> immediately.
>
>
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
>
> Business, Government and Tax Law
>
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of
> nestor at pplsweb.com <mailto:nestor at pplsweb.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:40 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
> Subject: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
>
>
> PC?s neighbor has an old fence that has been over the PC?s property line
> for some time. They amicably agreed that neighbor will remove old fence and
> build a new fence inside neighbors property. I want to draft an agreement
> attaching a recent survey as an exhibit and record the same, where neighbor
> agrees to remove fence and neighbor has license to maintain fence
> temporarily and thereafter remove the same, and further where neighbor
> releases and quitclaims any right to PC?s property.
>
>
>
> I don?t want to call it a Boundary Line Agreement, since we don?t want to
> go the route of having the surveyor record the Survey and its definitely
> not a BL Adjustment.
>
>
>
> Can I simply record such an ?Agreement? and attach a survey without any
> complications from the recording office?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/675843e9/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 01:39:45 +0000
> From: Kim Sandher <KSandher at pivotallawgroup.com>
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Cc: "matt at yakimalaw.com" <matt at yakimalaw.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Recommendation
> Message-ID:
>         <
> 6d5aa8612bf94fbbb0515f93cf615ba7 at MBX081-E6-VA-4.exch081.serverpod.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Bryce,
>
> I recommend Matt Kaminski at Yakima Law. I've cc'd him here and his
> contact is below:
>
> Yakima Law, PLLC
> 212 N Naches Ave
> Yakima, WA 98901-2438
> United States
>
>
>
> Email:
>
> matt at yakimalaw.com<mailto:matt at yakimalaw.com>
>
> Phone:
>
> (509) 903-9500
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kim Sandher
> Attorney at Law
> [cid:image001.jpg at 01D33B6F.7E8D8990]
>
> IBM Building
> 1200 5th Avenue, Suite 1217
> Seattle, Washington 98101
> Telephone 206.340.2008
> Direct 206.805.1490
> Facsimile 206.340.1962
> www.PivotalLawGroup.com<http://www.pivotallawgroup.com/>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Bryce Dille
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:25 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] Recommendation
>
> Need referral for client involved in a dissolution action in Yakima very
> substantial assets involved any recommendations would be appreciated thanks
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
> Dille Law, PLLC
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
> Olympia, Washington 98502
> www.dillelaw.com<http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender immediately.
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
> Business, Government and Tax Law
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190712/d4a96a69/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 3907 bytes
> Desc: image001.jpg
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190712/d4a96a69/image001-0001.jpg
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:03:13 -0700
> From: <nestor at pplsweb.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
> Message-ID: <000e01d53856$1410dcd0$3c329670$@pplsweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I am speaking of course about the quitclaim deed.
>
>
>
> Nestor
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> On Behalf Of nestor at pplsweb.com
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 6:25 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
>
>
> Great ideas. Since there is no money changing hands would exemption under
> WAC 458-61A-215 (1) apply and for reasons we state ?Clear upon any issue
> regarding adverse possession?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Gregory L.
> Ursich
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 9:38 AM
> To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
> Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
>
>
> I wouldn?t record that kind of Agreement. I would have a written private
> settlement and set a date certain by which neighbors agree to remove and
> relocate fence, and when the fence is moved have the survey revised to
> reflect fence is located on the boundary or on neighboring property. Then
> record the revised survey. You can incentivized the neighbors to act
> quickly by either offering them $500 to comply timely with the agreement,
> or have a liquidated damages clause where they pay a $1000 penalty if the
> fence is not removed in time. Also include an attorney fees clause and make
> agreement enforceable in a subsequent court action if they do not comply.
> You can also include a term for them to separately sign a quit claim deed
> to your clients property, given in consideration to resolve a boundary
> dispute, and record that right away as soon as they sign the deed and
> settlement agreement. -Greg Ursich, Inslee Best 425-455-1234
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:07 AM, Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com <mailto:
> Bryce at dillelaw.com> > wrote:
>
> The only way you can do it so it is recognized by the county as a proper
> division is under RCW 58.04.007 also see if property to be conveyed is
> subject to mortgage or deed of trust other wise the new parcel will be
> partially encumbered until it is released also see if there is a judgment
> lien against the conveyed parcel so need a title report.
>
>
>
> Bryce H. Dille | Attorney at Law
>
> Dille Law, PLLC
>
> P: 360-350-0270 | F: 844-210-4503
>
> 2010 Caton Way SW, Suite 101
>
> Olympia, Washington 98502
>
> www.dillelaw.com <http://www.dillelaw.com/>
>
>
>
> This transmission contains confidential attorney-client communications and
> may not be disclosed to any person but the intended recipient(s).  If this
> matter is transmitted to you in error, please notify the sender
> immediately.
>
>
>
> Business Entity Creation and Management
>
> Business, Government and Tax Law
>
> Real Estate and Land Use, Residential, Commercial and Condominium
> Development Real Estate and Commercial Transactions & Closings, Including
> Performing Services as IRS Section 1031 Exchange Facilitator Estate
> Planning, including Wills and Trusts, and Probate Administration
> Representation Homeowners/Condominium Association Real Estate Developments
> Real Property Foreclosures and Forfeitures
>
>
>
> From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
> <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of
> nestor at pplsweb.com <mailto:nestor at pplsweb.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 7:40 PM
> To: 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:
> wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
> Subject: [WSBARP] Fence Encroachment
>
>
>
> PC?s neighbor has an old fence that has been over the PC?s property line
> for some time. They amicably agreed that neighbor will remove old fence and
> build a new fence inside neighbors property. I want to draft an agreement
> attaching a recent survey as an exhibit and record the same, where neighbor
> agrees to remove fence and neighbor has license to maintain fence
> temporarily and thereafter remove the same, and further where neighbor
> releases and quitclaims any right to PC?s property.
>
>
>
> I don?t want to call it a Boundary Line Agreement, since we don?t want to
> go the route of having the surveyor record the Survey and its definitely
> not a BL Adjustment.
>
>
>
> Can I simply record such an ?Agreement? and attach a survey without any
> complications from the recording office?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Licensed in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it.
> If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by
> return e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and
> delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
> forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
> contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by
> the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190711/fa04302e/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:53:41 -0700
> From: <nestor at pplsweb.com>
> To: "'WSBA Real Property Listserv'" <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> Subject: [WSBARP] 1031 Exchange of Vacation or secondary Home
> Message-ID: <013401d5377a$d0856ac0$71904040$@pplsweb.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Are 1031 Exchanges done with vacation or secondary Homes?
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Gorfinkel, Attorney at Law
>
> Admitted to practice law in Washington & Florida
>
> Florida Civil-Law (International) Notary
>
> Puget Property Legal Services
>
> 2018 156th Ave NE
>
> Bellevue, WA 98007
>
> Tel. (425) 961-0519
>
> Fax. (888) 522-3601
>
>
>
>
>
> ATTENTION - This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to
> hard
> copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you
> have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return
> e-mail or by telephone at the phone numbers provided herein and delete this
> message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded
> message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of
> this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender.
>
>
>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190710/b6dbe556/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ***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.***
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
> End of WSBARP Digest, Vol 58, Issue 10
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20190725/9c9d77c3/attachment.html>