[WSBARP] WSBARP Digest, Vol 95, Issue 25
Paul Neumiller
pneumiller at hotmail.com
Tue Aug 30 16:27:11 PDT 2022
All great ideas. The client is going to document everything. Thank you.
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8BC8D.436012D0]
From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Stephen Whitehouse
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2022 12:48 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] WSBARP Digest, Vol 95, Issue 25
There seems to be very little law relating to abandoned tangible property. RCW 59.18 does not apply in any strict sense, but it seems to me that if you follow that, then you have acted in a commercially reasonable manner. What I generally do is, first, take a lot of photos. Second, decide what has any appreciable value, including intrinsic value. A lot of times the property that is left is just junk but I suspect that is not the case in your situation. I would then give advance notice of what you intend to do it the property is not removed in 30days. If you had property that really seems to have some real value, then you might engage an auction service. If it is more than junk but not anything of significant value, then you could do a garage sale. Then take the unsold items to the dump. While you may not be required to, if there are photos or other keepsakes, I would box them up and deliver to the relative.
You also have the issue of whether you can charge for storage, etc. If you have to go to the trouble of a sale, then you might invoke that. If the person comes and picks the property up, I never have clients invoke that. It just makes things far more difficult to resolve, the person who vacated probably doesn't have the money, and the goal is to just get it done as quickly as possible and get the place rented back out.
Steve
Stephen Whitehouse
Whitehouse & Nichols, LLP
P.O. Box 1273
601 W. Railroad Ave.
Shelton, Wa. 98584
360-426-5885
swhite8893 at aol.com<mailto:swhite8893 at aol.com>
-----Original Message-----
From: wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Sent: Sat, Aug 27, 2022 12:00 pm
Subject: WSBARP Digest, Vol 95, Issue 25
Send WSBARP mailing list submissions to
wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=u5nw47mKIZ2CY49aIKwQOjZhVoedEyZC9FWeV%2FsvlLE%3D&reserved=0>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-request at lists.wsbarppt.com>
You can reach the person managing the list at
wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto: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: Occupant's Personal Property (Catherine Clark)
2. Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration (Paul Neumiller)
3. Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration (Maxwell Glasson)
4. Physical evictions (Craig Gourley)
5. Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration (Kaitlyn Jackson)
6. Pierce County Code Enforcement (Mark Anderson)
7. Re: Physical evictions (Paul Neumiller)
8. Homeowner assessments and Real estate contracts (John McCrady)
9. Re: Physical evictions (Craig Gourley)
10. Re: Homeowner assessments and Real estate contracts (Bryce Dille)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 20:11:54 +0000
From: Catherine Clark <Cat at loccc.com<mailto:Cat at loccc.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>,
"Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>)"
<realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Occupant's Personal Property
Message-ID:
<MWHPR19MB13283D3C097B6D88B57ABC5BA3759 at MWHPR19MB1328.namprd19.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MWHPR19MB13283D3C097B6D88B57ABC5BA3759 at MWHPR19MB1328.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
How about getting one of those storage units that is moveable delivered to the house, fill it with the belongings, and have it delivered to her new home? And send the bill for the cost along with the way to access it.
Catherine "Cat" Clark
Law Office of Catherine C. Clark PLLC
110 Prefontaine Place South, Ste. 304
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: (206) 838-2528
Cell: (206) 409-8938
Email: cat at loccc.com<mailto:cat at loccc.com><mailto:cat at loccc.com<mailto:cat at loccc.com>>
NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic information transmission is confidential. 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 prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at (206) 838-2528. Thank you.
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 Paul Neumiller
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 11:38 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>; Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>) <realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Occupant's Personal Property
Long story but essentially: family relative (borderline hoarder) lives in owner's residence rent-free for years. Relative now moves out (and moves in with new rich husband) and locks are changed a couple of months ago. But, relative leaves a ton of stuff in residence and constantly delays in moving stuff. Client's patience is up. This doesn't seem to be a basic bailment situation under the WA UCC (Chapter 62A.7) (unless you all say otherwise.) Even though residence owner never brought a UD action, can (should?) the owner follow the procedure set forth in RCW59.18.310(2) regarding abandoned stuff? Client is willing to follow RCW 59.18.310 and hire people to move stuff to storage and then dumpster it all after the 45-day notice period is up.
My problem is that this subsection starts with "In the event of such abandonment of tenancy and an accompanying default in the payment of rent by the tenant," the LL may follow the abandonment procedure. Since the residence was occupied rent-free, we have no "default in the payment of rent." If a tenant's "abandonment" doesn't work, what does work??? Client needs to stay legal (remember, it's a long story.)
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.3E5DBAA0<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.3E5DBAA0>]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/4ffa8efd/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F4ffa8efd%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=GnpViKnJ2QaoDG9OeCm7BjVwL9YzcV63UBohyMcve%2FU%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/4ffa8efd/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F4ffa8efd%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2B4t1ob9EEvb5MUf%2BA%2FeLopMPzIs9Wk5doqBuwSQ2mtM%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 20:19:22 +0000
From: Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>
To: Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
Cc: "Listserve RealProp \(realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>\)"
<realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>, WSBA Real Property Listserv
<wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
Message-ID:
<MW3PR13MB3980B810EEBD3FF0E0D87EDBD2759 at MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MW3PR13MB3980B810EEBD3FF0E0D87EDBD2759 at MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
For the good of the cause, I found this case:
"Under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of 1973, chapter 59.18 RCW, landlords and tenants may agree to arbitration governed by chapter 7.04A RCW. RCW 59.18.320. But in certain actions, including unlawful detainer actions filed by landlords, arbitration is not allowed. RCW 59.18.320(1 )(b)(ii)." Barr v. Young (187 Wash.App. 105, 347 P.3d 947 (Wash. App. 2015)
AND, surprise of all surprises, it's a published case!
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.A1BA9690<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.A1BA9690>]
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system.
E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact the sender.
From: Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 11:07 AM
To: Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>
Cc: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>; Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>) <realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>
Subject: Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
Paul,
I believe RCW 59.18.320(1)(b)(ii) is usually interpreted to exempt evictions from arbitration clauses. I'm not aware of reported case law, but I believe that's what some of the practice desk books say as well. I would start the eviction and address it if the tenant raises arbitration as a defense. You must still give the pre-eviction notices and waiting periods. Additionally, from what I remember about compelling AAA arbitration, it is acceptable to file a case before giving a demand for arbitration and then move the court to compel arbitration post-filing and post-service so that you have a live case number to use to enforce any arbitration award if it does go that way.
Christopher D. Cutting
Cutting Law Office PC
p. 206.788.8840
www.cuttinglaw.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CyeFKIenccXI9XEge4uHkov8iRRxPQxOfrxxPJU6y6w%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XeW4vsvsO6onLUdZhd2rRKNyif8vLCDMsGrYgiE%2BVzY%3D&reserved=0>>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 1:16 PM Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com><mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>> wrote:
Any guidance is appreciated here. I need to evict a T for cause but the lease has a mandatory arbitration clause requiring AAA rules. I have spoken with AAA and reviewed RC 59.18.320-350 and a quick review of Chapter 7.04A. So how is this usually done? Do I file for UD first and then move the court to send us off to arbitration, then bring the decision back and move the court to enforce the arbitrator's decision by ordering the Writ of Restitution? OR, do I force the T into arbitration first and THEN take the arbitrator's decision to the Court to enforce? I feel uncomfortable with going to arbitration first because it appears to bypass T protections such as a court-appointed attorney, etc. Many thanks. (I'm sure that we'd all rather be anywhere else than in the office on this beautiful Friday afternoon.)
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.A1BA9690<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B94D.A1BA9690>]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KCBA Real Property" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realprop+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe at googlegroups.com><mailto:realprop+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realprop/MW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%40MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dSDBBNh6rgp6NwUo4pv80ObqrKa0g7mzU%2FRTAvyduOU%3D&reserved=0><https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OuoldpbHRcqnofDh3MA9yafCktN%2BSQVwTj99ye6VWh4%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287406564%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3HLi%2Bwtxn%2B3GCapoc8cwqcWp2e7xfjouoQqjVh6XOjg%3D&reserved=0>>.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/269a6dc7/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F269a6dc7%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4q0F2voqCNLiY%2BCGjAYD47Ve%2Bd7ARvkPIVw%2BewkE83g%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/269a6dc7/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F269a6dc7%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sCau75zACgdXCvG1TG0YKKu35KDT0nfTcd1qqdQMzOE%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 20:24:56 +0000
From: Maxwell Glasson <max at glassonlegal.com<mailto:max at glassonlegal.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>,
Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
Cc: "Listserve RealProp \(realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>\)"
<realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
Message-ID:
<BL3P221MB05947B8FFF0E8D20DF81BDD3C9759 at BL3P221MB0594.NAMP221.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM<mailto:BL3P221MB05947B8FFF0E8D20DF81BDD3C9759 at BL3P221MB0594.NAMP221.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks Paul and Christopher!
Maxwell B. Glasson
Glasson Legal, PLLC
8 Boston Street, Suite 2
Seattle, Washington, 98109
(206) 627-0528
max at glassonlegal.com<mailto:max at glassonlegal.com><mailto:max at glassonlegal.com<mailto:max at glassonlegal.com>>
www.glassonlegal.com<http://www.glassonlegal.com/<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.glassonlegal.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Lqh3bjzDj7l4gbqC6oxerqh62xe30jR%2Fg7LvY1SeVJY%3D&reserved=0>>
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<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> On Behalf Of Paul Neumiller
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 1:19 PM
To: Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
Cc: Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>) <realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>; WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
For the good of the cause, I found this case:
"Under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of 1973, chapter 59.18 RCW, landlords and tenants may agree to arbitration governed by chapter 7.04A RCW. RCW 59.18.320. But in certain actions, including unlawful detainer actions filed by landlords, arbitration is not allowed. RCW 59.18.320(1 )(b)(ii)." Barr v. Young (187 Wash.App. 105, 347 P.3d 947 (Wash. App. 2015)
AND, surprise of all surprises, it's a published case!
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B94F.3B4C22F0<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B94F.3B4C22F0>]
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system.
E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact the sender.
From: Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com><mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2022 11:07 AM
To: Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com><mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>>
Cc: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com><mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>>; Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com><mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>) <realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com><mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>>
Subject: Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
Paul,
I believe RCW 59.18.320(1)(b)(ii) is usually interpreted to exempt evictions from arbitration clauses. I'm not aware of reported case law, but I believe that's what some of the practice desk books say as well. I would start the eviction and address it if the tenant raises arbitration as a defense. You must still give the pre-eviction notices and waiting periods. Additionally, from what I remember about compelling AAA arbitration, it is acceptable to file a case before giving a demand for arbitration and then move the court to compel arbitration post-filing and post-service so that you have a live case number to use to enforce any arbitration award if it does go that way.
Christopher D. Cutting
Cutting Law Office PC
p. 206.788.8840
www.cuttinglaw.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CyeFKIenccXI9XEge4uHkov8iRRxPQxOfrxxPJU6y6w%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vosX4aRZF2UxDMW1o5%2FcLyTii6ZyAMUGwGyDFYmWN5Q%3D&reserved=0>>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 1:16 PM Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com><mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>> wrote:
Any guidance is appreciated here. I need to evict a T for cause but the lease has a mandatory arbitration clause requiring AAA rules. I have spoken with AAA and reviewed RC 59.18.320-350 and a quick review of Chapter 7.04A. So how is this usually done? Do I file for UD first and then move the court to send us off to arbitration, then bring the decision back and move the court to enforce the arbitrator's decision by ordering the Writ of Restitution? OR, do I force the T into arbitration first and THEN take the arbitrator's decision to the Court to enforce? I feel uncomfortable with going to arbitration first because it appears to bypass T protections such as a court-appointed attorney, etc. Many thanks. (I'm sure that we'd all rather be anywhere else than in the office on this beautiful Friday afternoon.)
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B94F.3B4C22F0<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B94F.3B4C22F0>]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KCBA Real Property" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to realprop+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe at googlegroups.com><mailto:realprop+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>>.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realprop/MW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%40MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Lk6NBIDFoAcqSiuI2rzlrBdeBqxggfmnch0zsrVpMgI%3D&reserved=0><https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OuoldpbHRcqnofDh3MA9yafCktN%2BSQVwTj99ye6VWh4%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SOmspGq2QQk71tXtyx6U0T4wWrqDaFnHtvB%2FbvQZigA%3D&reserved=0>>.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/9f9ae342/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F9f9ae342%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=cnYt5VqNWO%2BWgyfgabyKVT8DWitS1XwN1%2BiO1mLY23o%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/9f9ae342/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F9f9ae342%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=oHgfedooyqKygLPASu%2FMu4hrLqGuWgR%2BhOWcBZw%2FZw0%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 21:29:30 +0000
From: Craig Gourley <craig at glgmail.com<mailto:craig at glgmail.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
Message-ID:
<MW3PR12MB43628FD1C730C56948D1D0EEAE759 at MW3PR12MB4362.namprd12.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MW3PR12MB43628FD1C730C56948D1D0EEAE759 at MW3PR12MB4362.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Listmates, I thought I would give a brief report on recent experiences on physical evictions. In my 38 years of playing this game I had only had 2 physical evictions, until now. I have had 3 in the last month. The local jurisdictions appear to not have any understanding of the statute governing tenant property. These are cases with no requests for storage by the tenant.
Yakima: I was advised by the Sheriff that everything had to be moved to the margin of the road ( so far so good) and left for 24 hours. They then advised us that we could not touch it for 24 hours ( again accurate) but after expiration of such time we, as landlord would be cited if the property was not immediately removed. Apparently Yakima thinks its municipal code overrides the state statute. Fortunately the argument was avoided by the tenant, on video, instructing us to discard everything and not place it on public property, ( 4000 pounds to the dump in 100 degree weather- that was a fun day. )
Sedro Woolley: To avoid the issue here we called the City in advance, telling them we were doing a physical eviction and wanted to make sure we were all on the same page. We were send on the bureaucratic circuit from public works, planning and eventually the police department, working our way up to a lieutenant. None of them understood the law and made various demands and essentially threats. We finally got the name of the City attorney whom we were advised would not speak to us. Code enforcement was dispatched and they demanded that we place the tenants belongings on our property. We advised her this was not correct and the Skagit County Deputy overseeing the eviction read her the RCW off his phone. Despite it saying nearest public property, code enforcement says we cannot deposit it on a street, alley or sidewalk. She required us to haul it to the next block and place it between the road and sidewalk. Gwendolyn from our office was able to speak with the City At!
torney who agreed that 1. We were supposed to deposit on the nearest public property. 2. Legally we could not touch it again and could not be held responsible for its removal. She supposedly was advising the City as such. We will see if we get a citation is in the mail.
So the point here is be ready to do battle with the municipality that will be ignorant of the law and will try to treat it a essentially " littering" by the landlord. They will cite you and charge you for the removal. Go armed with a copy of the statute and if possible, have a conversation with the City/ County attorney in advance. Such fun.
GOURLEY LAW GROUP
THE EXCHANGE CONNECTION
SNOHOMISH ESCROW
P.O. Box 1091
Snohomish, WA 98291
PH: (360) 568-5065 (800) 291-8401
Fax: (360) 568-8092
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain legally privileged, confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action based on the contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please contact sender and delete all copies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/4bb784b9/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F4bb784b9%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ERrwZL2rFwVrrBa5sIDeKTmXQqe6vPT7fakXXjofcZg%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 14:32:36 -0700
From: Kaitlyn Jackson <kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com<mailto:kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Cc: "Listserve RealProp \(realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>\)"
<realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>, Christopher Cutting
<christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
Message-ID:
<CAO+NF_6hsV2TVGquTQU8prkPH1zOizO4HD8NpoxwGgHB+mxjPw at mail.gmail.com<mailto:mxjPw at mail.gmail.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
You're a hero, Paul! Thank you!
*Sent with Right Inbox <https://www.rightinbox.com/?utm_source=signature<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rightinbox.com%2F%3Futm_source%3Dsignature&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6OujtGmrg6R0yVtekLumLj4DgcNoxSP3KjdVWf5%2FeL8%3D&reserved=0>>*
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 1:27 PM Maxwell Glasson <max at glassonlegal.com<mailto:max at glassonlegal.com>>
wrote:
> Thanks Paul and Christopher!
>
>
>
> Maxwell B. Glasson
>
> *Glasson Legal, PLLC*
>
> 8 Boston Street, Suite 2
>
> 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<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> *On Behalf Of *Paul Neumiller
> *Sent:* Friday, August 26, 2022 1:19 PM
> *To:* Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
> *Cc:* Listserve RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>) <
> realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>; WSBA Real Property Listserv <
> wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
>
>
>
> For the good of the cause, I found this case:
>
>
>
> "Under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of 1973, chapter 59.18 RCW,
> landlords and tenants may agree to arbitration governed by chapter 7.04A
> RCW. RCW 59.18.320. *But in certain actions, including unlawful detainer
> actions filed by landlords, arbitration is not allowed. RCW 59.18.320(1
> )(b)(ii)."* Barr v. Young (187 Wash.App. 105, 347 P.3d 947 (Wash. App.
> 2015)
>
>
>
> AND, surprise of all surprises, it?s a published case!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by
> persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain.
> E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain
> information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to
> non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged.
> Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the
> intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error,
> please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your
> computer system.
>
>
>
> E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk
> that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There
> may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product
> privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this
> message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice,
> please contact the sender.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Christopher Cutting <christopher at cuttinglaw.com<mailto:christopher at cuttinglaw.com>>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 23, 2022 11:07 AM
> *To:* Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>
> *Cc:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>; Listserve
> RealProp (realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>) <realprop at googlegroups.com<mailto:realprop at googlegroups.com>>
> *Subject:* Re: [REALPROP] UD and Arbitration
>
>
>
> Paul,
>
> I believe RCW 59.18.320(1)(b)(ii) is usually interpreted to exempt
> evictions from arbitration clauses. I'm not aware of reported case law, but
> I believe that's what some of the practice desk books say as well. I would
> start the eviction and address it if the tenant raises arbitration as a
> defense. You must still give the pre-eviction notices and waiting periods.
> Additionally, from what I remember about compelling AAA arbitration, it is
> acceptable to file a case before giving a demand for arbitration and then
> move the court to compel arbitration post-filing and post-service so that
> you have a live case number to use to enforce any arbitration award if it
> does go that way.
>
>
> Christopher D. Cutting
>
> Cutting Law Office PC
>
> p. 206.788.8840
>
> www.cuttinglaw.com<http://www.cuttinglaw.com>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CyeFKIenccXI9XEge4uHkov8iRRxPQxOfrxxPJU6y6w%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuttinglaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vosX4aRZF2UxDMW1o5%2FcLyTii6ZyAMUGwGyDFYmWN5Q%3D&reserved=0>>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 1:16 PM Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Any guidance is appreciated here. I need to evict a T for cause but the
> lease has a mandatory arbitration clause requiring AAA rules. I have
> spoken with AAA and reviewed RC 59.18.320-350 and a quick review of Chapter
> 7.04A. So how is this usually done? Do I file for UD first and then move
> the court to send us off to arbitration, then bring the decision back and
> move the court to enforce the arbitrator?s decision by ordering the Writ of
> Restitution? OR, do I force the T into arbitration first and THEN take the
> arbitrator?s decision to the Court to enforce? I feel uncomfortable with
> going to arbitration first because it appears to bypass T protections such
> as a court-appointed attorney, etc. Many thanks. (I?m sure that we?d all
> rather be anywhere else than in the office on this beautiful Friday
> afternoon.)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "KCBA Real Property" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to realprop+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.<mailto:unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.>
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/realprop/MW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%40MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Lk6NBIDFoAcqSiuI2rzlrBdeBqxggfmnch0zsrVpMgI%3D&reserved=0>
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7C4f979dfc7f9a4ccb655e08da85324c65%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637968748327876067%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OuoldpbHRcqnofDh3MA9yafCktN%2BSQVwTj99ye6VWh4%3D&reserved=0<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Frealprop%2FMW3PR13MB3980C6D397CA58065A002EF7D26C9%2540MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SOmspGq2QQk71tXtyx6U0T4wWrqDaFnHtvB%2FbvQZigA%3D&reserved=0>>
> .
>
> ***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<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IStm9v48OMTw9nAC3egJ%2Bqk3U2IowijDqBCDXS65vJ4%3D&reserved=0>
>
--
Thank you,
Kaitlyn R. Jackson, Senior Associate Attorney
Dimension Law Group, PLLC
*Office:* 206-973-3500?*Fax:* 206-577-5090
*Email: **kaitlyn**@dimensionlaw.com<mailto:**kaitlyn**@dimensionlaw.com> <http://dimensionlaw.com/<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdimensionlaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287562858%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wzJHC6ceES59nXLtsNi%2BFNwNH0%2BqE2yBVD%2BbiX316eM%3D&reserved=0>>*
*www.dimensionlaw.com <http://www.dimensionlaw.com/<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dimensionlaw.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=l9%2FaSJgrfSi8J%2FEaYE6ZYtWaiDEkibl%2B3oBZlzkCSkM%3D&reserved=0>>*
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/20220826/18d18884/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F18d18884%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p6QBAWn8bkw5t8Kl2d9DrRU0A%2Fcxir7VOsM4ngWdwAk%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/18d18884/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F18d18884%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VySEqiKDmQAUbhFtPSHGTVDqJ5gg5AEhXqMVNxcDnx0%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:20:06 +0000
From: Mark Anderson <marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Pierce County Code Enforcement
Message-ID:
<SN1PR12MB2381952AD56D57300CDEB183C8759 at SN1PR12MB2381.namprd12.prod.outlook.com<mailto:SN1PR12MB2381952AD56D57300CDEB183C8759 at SN1PR12MB2381.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear All:
Happy Friday!
Potential client called and said, as I remember, that he just received notice from Pierce County that a structure on his property did not conform to code. He is troubled by the fact that the improvement was completed years ago, and no one has said anything until now.
Is anyone well-versed in this sort of matter and are you willing to talk to him? I'd be happy to pass names along to him.
Thanks.
Mark B. Anderson
ANDERSON LAW FIRM PLLC
821 Dock St Ste 209 PMB 4-12
Tacoma, Washington 98402
+1 253-327-1750
+1 253-327-1751 (fax)
marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com><mailto:marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com>>
www.mbaesq.com<http://www.mbaesq.com/<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mbaesq.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y6qxigDnPbEVT8Y9kkVryvqZLlGZYnxciLmDqfsM%2BCU%3D&reserved=0>>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This transmission is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual named recipient. It may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other confidentiality protection. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender via e-mail or by telephone at (253) 327-1750 that you have received the message in error, and then delete it. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/df8cba37/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2Fdf8cba37%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Jg%2BMSuzD%2BrHMFEf7D7uwvu8W%2B41NoQgs8jrjOM%2BD2Fc%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:29:02 +0000
From: Paul Neumiller <pneumiller at hotmail.com<mailto:pneumiller at hotmail.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
Message-ID:
<MW3PR13MB3980F721285775A6BE834F04D2759 at MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MW3PR13MB3980F721285775A6BE834F04D2759 at MW3PR13MB3980.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
"2. Legally we could not touch it again and could not be held responsible for its removal."
Craig, where is the legal authority for this statement?
I have one local municipality tell me recently that while the RCW says the landlord shall move the tenant's personal possessions to the near public place, that doesn't mean the landlord can do it for free. Where is the authority that the LL is not responsible for its removal?
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B960.542E9E90<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B960.542E9E90>]
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system.
E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact the sender.
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 Craig Gourley
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 2:30 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
Listmates, I thought I would give a brief report on recent experiences on physical evictions. In my 38 years of playing this game I had only had 2 physical evictions, until now. I have had 3 in the last month. The local jurisdictions appear to not have any understanding of the statute governing tenant property. These are cases with no requests for storage by the tenant.
Yakima: I was advised by the Sheriff that everything had to be moved to the margin of the road ( so far so good) and left for 24 hours. They then advised us that we could not touch it for 24 hours ( again accurate) but after expiration of such time we, as landlord would be cited if the property was not immediately removed. Apparently Yakima thinks its municipal code overrides the state statute. Fortunately the argument was avoided by the tenant, on video, instructing us to discard everything and not place it on public property, ( 4000 pounds to the dump in 100 degree weather- that was a fun day. )
Sedro Woolley: To avoid the issue here we called the City in advance, telling them we were doing a physical eviction and wanted to make sure we were all on the same page. We were send on the bureaucratic circuit from public works, planning and eventually the police department, working our way up to a lieutenant. None of them understood the law and made various demands and essentially threats. We finally got the name of the City attorney whom we were advised would not speak to us. Code enforcement was dispatched and they demanded that we place the tenants belongings on our property. We advised her this was not correct and the Skagit County Deputy overseeing the eviction read her the RCW off his phone. Despite it saying nearest public property, code enforcement says we cannot deposit it on a street, alley or sidewalk. She required us to haul it to the next block and place it between the road and sidewalk. Gwendolyn from our office was able to speak with the City At!
torney who agreed that 1. We were supposed to deposit on the nearest public property. 2. Legally we could not touch it again and could not be held responsible for its removal. She supposedly was advising the City as such. We will see if we get a citation is in the mail.
So the point here is be ready to do battle with the municipality that will be ignorant of the law and will try to treat it a essentially " littering" by the landlord. They will cite you and charge you for the removal. Go armed with a copy of the statute and if possible, have a conversation with the City/ County attorney in advance. Such fun.
GOURLEY LAW GROUP
THE EXCHANGE CONNECTION
SNOHOMISH ESCROW
P.O. Box 1091
Snohomish, WA 98291
PH: (360) 568-5065 (800) 291-8401
Fax: (360) 568-8092
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain legally privileged, confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action based on the contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please contact sender and delete all copies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/bedc4eea/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2Fbedc4eea%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gio5fge28abydyk1Ft5iRdTZYfh1qe6k6rIX8%2FY8evI%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/bedc4eea/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2Fbedc4eea%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=LobNuJZAzI3EyvbgMY5Ipcw8IUchRLg%2FDTZartr2J%2BQ%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:32:03 +0000
From: John McCrady <j.mccrady at pstitle.com<mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com>>
To: "WSBA Real Property (wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM<mailto:wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM>)"
<wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM<mailto:wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Homeowner assessments and Real estate contracts
Message-ID: <b92cdbaee52e4ff8a84f2de96c60e14d at PST-MAIL.pstitle.com<mailto:b92cdbaee52e4ff8a84f2de96c60e14d at PST-MAIL.pstitle.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The LPB 44 contains the following language:
TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, AND UTILITY LIENS. Purchaser agrees to pay by the date due all taxes and assessments becoming a lien against the property after the date of this Contract.
Has anyone seen the "Assessments" construed to include Homeowner's Association assessments?
We don't use Real Estate Contracts very much in Pierce County!
John McCrady
Counsel
Puget Sound Title Company
5350 Orchard Street West
University Place WA 98467
253-476-5721
j.mccrady at pstitle.com<mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com><mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com<mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com>>
Beginning July 26, 2021, recording fees for most documents recorded in Washington will increase by $100<https://www.piercecountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/105275/Recording-Fee-Schedule-Effective-Jul-25-2021-<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.piercecountywa.gov%2FDocumentCenter%2FView%2F105275%2FRecording-Fee-Schedule-Effective-Jul-25-2021-&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fC5JZBX92r1Rsy9GYagTHR48ytnpUAaj%2BG%2Fi4m4PNgE%3D&reserved=0>>. Please be sure to collect recording fees accordingly. Due to the above increase, our Reconveyance fees will also be increased by $100.00
WARNING-FRAUDULENT FUNDING INSTRUCTIONS
Email hacking and fraud are on the rise to fraudulently misdirect funds. Please call your escrow officer immediately using contact information found from an independent source, such as the sales contract or internet, to verify any funding instructions received. We are not responsible for any wire sent by you to an incorrect bank account.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/3eb62161/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F3eb62161%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=WYysEWOns5yBeXFLRQGCxfNq37ITVTjlfHqGx%2B%2BTf0U%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:43:27 +0000
From: Craig Gourley <craig at glgmail.com<mailto:craig at glgmail.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
Message-ID:
<MW3PR12MB436231BC74951E3C04EDDED4AE759 at MW3PR12MB4362.namprd12.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MW3PR12MB436231BC74951E3C04EDDED4AE759 at MW3PR12MB4362.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It is not my property it belongs to the tenant. Once I have moved it by statutory authority and secured it ( covered) I have no right to take it, move it or dispose of it. It is not mine. To further make a point the tenant moved her disabled car to the road margin, would the landlord be responsible for that as well? Interesting argument that the statute does not say the LL can move it for free. Need to think about that one. I guess if it was a criminal cite and penalty, a civil citation and penalty or a " fee" would have a bearing. I don't see how they can cite you for following the law. Too late on a Friday to give much more of a thoughtful argument.
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 Paul Neumiller
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 3:29 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
"2. Legally we could not touch it again and could not be held responsible for its removal."
Craig, where is the legal authority for this statement?
I have one local municipality tell me recently that while the RCW says the landlord shall move the tenant's personal possessions to the near public place, that doesn't mean the landlord can do it for free. Where is the authority that the LL is not responsible for its removal?
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D8B961.F9E60FC0<mailto:image001.jpg at 01D8B961.F9E60FC0>]
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system.
E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact the sender.
From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com><mailto: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><mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>>> On Behalf Of Craig Gourley
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 2:30 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com><mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Physical evictions
Listmates, I thought I would give a brief report on recent experiences on physical evictions. In my 38 years of playing this game I had only had 2 physical evictions, until now. I have had 3 in the last month. The local jurisdictions appear to not have any understanding of the statute governing tenant property. These are cases with no requests for storage by the tenant.
Yakima: I was advised by the Sheriff that everything had to be moved to the margin of the road ( so far so good) and left for 24 hours. They then advised us that we could not touch it for 24 hours ( again accurate) but after expiration of such time we, as landlord would be cited if the property was not immediately removed. Apparently Yakima thinks its municipal code overrides the state statute. Fortunately the argument was avoided by the tenant, on video, instructing us to discard everything and not place it on public property, ( 4000 pounds to the dump in 100 degree weather- that was a fun day. )
Sedro Woolley: To avoid the issue here we called the City in advance, telling them we were doing a physical eviction and wanted to make sure we were all on the same page. We were send on the bureaucratic circuit from public works, planning and eventually the police department, working our way up to a lieutenant. None of them understood the law and made various demands and essentially threats. We finally got the name of the City attorney whom we were advised would not speak to us. Code enforcement was dispatched and they demanded that we place the tenants belongings on our property. We advised her this was not correct and the Skagit County Deputy overseeing the eviction read her the RCW off his phone. Despite it saying nearest public property, code enforcement says we cannot deposit it on a street, alley or sidewalk. She required us to haul it to the next block and place it between the road and sidewalk. Gwendolyn from our office was able to speak with the City At!
torney who agreed that 1. We were supposed to deposit on the nearest public property. 2. Legally we could not touch it again and could not be held responsible for its removal. She supposedly was advising the City as such. We will see if we get a citation is in the mail.
So the point here is be ready to do battle with the municipality that will be ignorant of the law and will try to treat it a essentially " littering" by the landlord. They will cite you and charge you for the removal. Go armed with a copy of the statute and if possible, have a conversation with the City/ County attorney in advance. Such fun.
GOURLEY LAW GROUP
THE EXCHANGE CONNECTION
SNOHOMISH ESCROW
P.O. Box 1091
Snohomish, WA 98291
PH: (360) 568-5065 (800) 291-8401
Fax: (360) 568-8092
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain legally privileged, confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action based on the contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please contact sender and delete all copies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/2de19cfa/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F2de19cfa%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SI5BTFJMRJvUfyvINklGutXAzJpLvZq4GZs6f%2B9UPn8%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220826/2de19cfa/image001-0001.jpg<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220826%2F2de19cfa%2Fimage001-0001.jpg&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zqTKZCs6do%2FL3fnm%2BYl0Hz6Rkt9KdFuk1zUe0HnBOz0%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 16:58:09 +0000
From: Bryce Dille <Bryce at dillelaw.com<mailto:Bryce at dillelaw.com>>
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Homeowner assessments and Real estate contracts
Message-ID:
<MN0PR11MB6230F85BE6F3E855DDD80A99C8749 at MN0PR11MB6230.namprd11.prod.outlook.com<mailto:MN0PR11MB6230F85BE6F3E855DDD80A99C8749 at MN0PR11MB6230.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The vast majority of CC and Rs provide unpaid assessments for common expenses are a lien against the lot assessed regardless of whether a written lien if filed and the courts have upheld this although I don't have a cite handy.
Bryce H. Dille
Dille Law, PLLC
2010 Caton Way SW Ste. 101
Olympia, WA 98502
Office: 360-350-0270
Cell: 253-579-5561
[R_Alan_Swanson-WH-200]
** Please note that I use the dictation feature of my iPhone and that sometimes everything I say does not get properly translated**
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 John McCrady
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 3:32 PM
To: WSBA Real Property (wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM<mailto:wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM>) <wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM<mailto:wsbarp at LISTS.WSBARPPT.COM>>
Subject: [WSBARP] Homeowner assessments and Real estate contracts
The LPB 44 contains the following language:
TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, AND UTILITY LIENS. Purchaser agrees to pay by the date due all taxes and assessments becoming a lien against the property after the date of this Contract.
Has anyone seen the "Assessments" construed to include Homeowner's Association assessments?
We don't use Real Estate Contracts very much in Pierce County!
John McCrady
Counsel
Puget Sound Title Company
5350 Orchard Street West
University Place WA 98467
253-476-5721
j.mccrady at pstitle.com<mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com><mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com<mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com>>
Beginning July 26, 2021, recording fees for most documents recorded in Washington will increase by $100<https://www.piercecountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/105275/Recording-Fee-Schedule-Effective-Jul-25-2021-<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.piercecountywa.gov%2FDocumentCenter%2FView%2F105275%2FRecording-Fee-Schedule-Effective-Jul-25-2021-&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fC5JZBX92r1Rsy9GYagTHR48ytnpUAaj%2BG%2Fi4m4PNgE%3D&reserved=0>>. Please be sure to collect recording fees accordingly. Due to the above increase, our Reconveyance fees will also be increased by $100.00
WARNING-FRAUDULENT FUNDING INSTRUCTIONS
Email hacking and fraud are on the rise to fraudulently misdirect funds. Please call your escrow officer immediately using contact information found from an independent source, such as the sales contract or internet, to verify any funding instructions received. We are not responsible for any wire sent by you to an incorrect bank account.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220827/814f4aa0/attachment-0001.html<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220827%2F814f4aa0%2Fattachment-0001.html&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=hSAtGI43tpQeLIL6q%2BptRtG1G%2BHPl%2FYEpXRqgj7Q8rM%3D&reserved=0>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8651 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220827/814f4aa0/image001-0001.png<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fpipermail%2Fwsbarp%2Fattachments%2F20220827%2F814f4aa0%2Fimage001-0001.png&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RoIhRPX0lA5UBDpxm0mlf3HGYTUbOBwFFydS%2BYyxnvc%3D&reserved=0>>
------------------------------
***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<https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=05%7C01%7C%7Cc9aa42eb21744f6d94ac08da886598c9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637972267287719015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JVvGKo9O8TI5JeoTNhAkqjUNnFaGwsUVBQOiVeNr%2B%2B8%3D&reserved=0>
End of WSBARP Digest, Vol 95, Issue 25
**************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220830/33a4458e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14264 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20220830/33a4458e/image001.jpg>
More information about the WSBARP
mailing list