[WSBARP] Dispute Resolution Certificates - Reissuance of Certificate

[Kaitlyn Jackson]

It is generally the rule that the DRCs do not look into the validity of the
service of the notices (and I don't think you want them to). It is also
generally the rule that the DRCs don't issue more than 1 certificate per
household. I don't want them to reconsider this position either because
sometimes it takes many months for them to process just 1 certificate. But
if you properly served the 14 day notice, the DRC Notice, and the Offer of
Reasonable Repayment plan even after the Certificate was issued, then you
have complied with the relevant UD statutes and can move the case forward.
If the defense counsel argues that the Certificate was issued after the
faulty notices were served, then the court has the opportunity to send it
back to mediation if the court deems it necessary. If the court is
convinced to dismiss the action entirely (unlikely), you can show them
court the communication with the DRC regarding their refusal to issue more
than 1 certificate and then the proper remedy, if there is concern, is to
go back to mediation.

I suggest making sure your Complaint is clear that the notices and required
documents were served twice.

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


On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 9:58 AM <Jeff at bellanddavispllc.com> wrote:

> Listmates:
>
>
>
> New twist on the Certificates needed to do a UDA.  Two matters I have
> involve the clients’ own service of the 14-day notice to vacate, on their
> tenants, without serving the PDRC notice, but serving PDRC with the 14 day
> notice.  (PDRC is the Peninsula Dispute Resolution Center that handles the
> UDA matters in Clallam and Jefferson Counties).  The Declarations of
> Service are also defective.  PDRC then issues its certificates when tenants
> fail to respond.  Clearly clients made improper service.  We start over
> with new, properly served, required documents.  PDRC then says they won’t
> reissue a new certificate, because they already issued one.  Problem is
> they don’t check on how service was done.  They  tell us the Court needs to
> decide this.  What the heck, I don’t want to file a UDA knowing service of
> the 14 day notice was defective; what kind of trouble am I getting myself
> into?  Have any of you run into this?  Plus, one of the certificates is
> over a year old, is there a time limit, some kind of statute of limitations
> in which the UDA must be filed?
>
>
>
> Jeff Davis
>
>
>
> *W. Jeff Davis*
>
> *BELL & DAVIS PLLC*
>
> *Attorneys at Law*
> P.O. Box 510
>
> 720 E. Washington Street, Suite 105
> Sequim WA 98382
> Phone: (360) 683.1129
> Fax: (360) 683.1258
> email: jeff at bellanddavispllc.com
> www.bellanddavispllc.com
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged,
> confidential, and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly
> prohibited. If you think that you have received this e-mail message in
> error, please e-mail the sender at info at bellanddavispllc.com  or call
> 360.683.1129.
>
>
>
>
> ***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
>


-- 

***PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF OUR NEW OFFICE ADDRESS BELOW.*


Thank you,


Kaitlyn R. Jackson, Senior Associate Attorney

Dimension Law Group, PLLC

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

*Email:* kaitlyn at dimensionlaw.com

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

631 Strander Blvd, Bldg A, Suite G, 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/20221018/e2d8941d/attachment.html>