[WSBARP] Is a 20 day Notice to Terminate Tenancy under 59.18.200 sufficient to evict?

[Maxwell Glasson]

Hi Julie,

If the tenancy has already become a month-to-month tenancy, then you can only give a "just-cause" notice under RCW 59.18.650(2).  If the lease was for a year term, and then converted to a month-to-month basis, the landlord would need to have given a 60-day notice prior to the expiration of the initial year term to have it terminate.  The same 60-day nonrenewal notice needs to be given even in the case of a lease that does not convert to month-to-month.

Regards,

Maxwell B. Glasson
Glasson Legal, PLLC
8 Boston Street, Suite 2                        Please note our new address.
Seattle, Washington, 98109
(206) 627-0528
max at glassonlegal.com<mailto:max at glassonlegal.com>
www.glassonlegal.com<http://www.glassonlegal.com/>
WA# 51948  NV# 13339  CA# 292356
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED. THE INFORMATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM OR THE ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Julie Vance
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 5:14 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBARP] Is a 20 day Notice to Terminate Tenancy under 59.18.200 sufficient to evict?

Hypothetical Facts:  A Landlord wants to terminate a month to month rental that was initially a year long lease approximately ten years ago.  Landlord formally served a 20 Day Notice to Terminate for Tenancy on Tenant more than 60 days prior to initiating the eviction process.

Issues:

  1.  Is 20 Day Notice to Terminate sufficient as it is listed under RCW 59.18.200?
  2.  What triggers the longer and more restrictive RCW 59.18.650?

I would appreciate all opinions on this conflict between RCW 59.18.200 and 59.18.650!

Sincerely
Julie A. Vance
Attorney At Law
PO Box 1224
514 S. Columbus Ave, Ste 8
Goldendale, WA 98620
Tel. (509) 773-4567
Fax (509) 773-3768

This communication does not create a client-attorney or any other client-professional relationship. This communication may contain privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing or using any of this information. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. You may not directly or indirectly reuse or redisclose such information for any purpose other than to provide the services for which you are receiving the information. If you received this communication in error, please contact (509)773-4567.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220428/5a8b407a/attachment.html>