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

[Kaitlyn Jackson]

Maxwell hit the nail on the head.

RCW 59.18.200 allows the *tenant *and *only the tenant* the right to
terminate the lease with 20 days notice. Otherwise any month to month is
only terminable by the landlord under Just Cause of RCW 59.18.650 or RCW
59.18.200(2).

Pursuant to RCW 59.18.650(4)
(4) A landlord who removes a tenant *or causes a tenant to be removed* from
a dwelling *in any way in violation of this section is liable to the tenant
for wrongful eviction,* and the tenant prevailing in such an action is
entitled to the greater of their economic and noneconomic damages or three
times the monthly rent of the dwelling at issue, and reasonable attorneys'
fees and court costs.

At this point, if the LL served that 20 day notice and the tenant believes
they need to move out - it could be argued that if the T moves out, and in
the process of moving out slips and falls and hurts themselves, then the LL
is liable to the tenant for what could be some pretty significant damages
because the notice was invalid and caused the tenant to be removed in
violation of the section.


Kaitlyn

*Sent with Right Inbox <https://www.rightinbox.com/?utm_source=signature>*


On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 5:59 PM Maxwell Glasson <max at glassonlegal.com>
wrote:

> 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
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***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



-- 

Thank you,



Kaitlyn R. Jackson, Senior Associate Attorney

Dimension Law Group, PLLC

*Office:*  206-973-3500│*Fax:*  206-577-5090

*Email: **kaitlyn**@dimensionlaw.com <http://dimensionlaw.com/>*

*www.dimensionlaw.com <http://www.dimensionlaw.com/>*

130 Andover Park East, Suite 300, Tukwila, WA 98188



PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:  This email (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 email is prohibited. If you have received
this email in error, please immediately notify us by email, facsimile, or
telephone; return the email to us at the email 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/20220428/088f9ad9/attachment.html>