[WSBARP] King County Recorder's Office - Notes about Gifting

Mon May 13 15:21:22 PDT 2024

Mark:
Thank you for your notes.  Very helpful.

Rod Harmon

RODNEY T. HARMON
       Attorney at Law
         P.O. Box 1066
      Bothell, WA   98041
     Tel:   (425) 402-7800
     Fax:  (425) 458-9096
    www.rodharmon.com<http://www.rodharmon.com/>
   rodharmon at msn.com<mailto:rodharmon at msn.com>

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Mark Anderson
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 4:41 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>; WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] King County Recorder's Office - Notes about Gifting

I've run into this before and I, too, suffered from a bit of head-banging.  Their need to "cite" to WAC 458-61A-201(b)(1) refers not to a specific paragraph/subparagraph of the WAC, but to "WAC 458-61A-201" and then to paragraph "B.1." on the Supplemental Statement (notwithstanding that it really is paragraph 2.B.1. on the Supplemental Statement, without parentheses).

One lesson I've learned: don't cite to examples in the WAC.

Another lesson I've learned: recording intake is rarely done by the same person every time, thus increasing the probability of different outcomes.

When I ran into this back in 2020 and was using the e-recording function of the Recorder's website, I made this series of notes to myself on the subject:

When using the e-recording function, the King County Recorder's Office has the following unwritten requirements.  Not following any one or more of them will result in your submission being rejected.

Even no there is no debt on the property, you are still required to answer the Yes/No question on the Supplemental Statement ("Has there been or will there be a refinance of the debt?").  We should be permitted to either leave the answer boxes to this question blank or add a block to check that says, "Not Applicable."  I have started checking "No" but also inserting the words "not applicable - no debt" right above that.

King County requires that the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit be scanned prior to the deed associated with it.

When describing a WAC exemption that requires a Supplemental Statement, instead of inserting a WAC subsection, King County requires that you insert the paragraph and subparagraph number that is being checked on the Supplemental Statement.

The "correct" WAC subsection for a gift without debt is 458-61A-201 / B.1.

King County does not always review the documents submitted carefully. Case in point: King County representative asserted that only one Supplemental Statement was necessary for a transaction that involved two separate Grantees each of whom was required to sign a Supplemental Statement.  Make sure this is pointed out in "Comments to Recorder."  Even if you include this, the person screening the submission and making the entries at the Recorder's Office doesn't scroll down that far on their screen and they will miss it.

The e-recording function rejected Excise Tax Affidavits on a partial sale of property.  The program said that the Excise Tax Affidavit submitted was "missing a document."  The King County Recorder's Office supervisor could not explain why that was the case. To correct the situation, we unchecked the "partial sale" box.

When recording a deed that requires the payment of an excise tax cover recording function does not calculate and collect that excise tax at the time of the submission despite the person recording the document having entered all that information necessary to make this calculation.  Instead, following submission, intervention by a representative of the King County Recorder's Office is necessary to charge the excise tax.  This takes control of the payment of excise tax away from the person recording the document.  This could result in a surprise charge against a credit card or escrow.

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>
www.mbaesq.com<http://www.mbaesq.com/>
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.

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 Brent Williams-Ruth
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 1:05 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>; WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
Subject: [WSBARP] King County Recorder's Office - Notes about Gifting

Colleagues -

For this Friday, I want to share some useful tips as well as the frustration of my recent filing experience.

Facts - 3 parcels all being gifted to Person A by Person B, no debt, no consideration.

One of the parcels recorded. Other two rejected - rejection reasons were NOT identical. To recap - three identical REETA (only changes were parcel, address, and valuation); three identical Gift Supplement Statements; two rejections for different reasons and ONE recorded on first try.

After I finished banging my head - I wrote to the Recorder's office saying I don't know how to make your employees happy. Please help. Here is what I learned.

#1 - I made the mistake of actually using the citation to the WAC 458-61a-201(6)(b)(i) - that was rejected because that is NOT an acceptable citation to the WAC.....I have to use the WAC as listed by the DOR on their approved list found at this link:   https://dor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-10/REETExemptions1-1-2023andAfter.xlsx

The official WAC reference to the exemption is 458-61A-201(b)(1). The fact that this is not an actual citation....fine, forget (6) but there is no #1 - it is a little i. Alas, the head beating continues.

#2 - The gift supplement has a question after you have checked the appropriate box. That question is - Has there been or will there be a refinance of the debt? YES or NO (check the box). According to Ms Priscilla Harper, Fiscal Specialist III with the Recorders Office - they have just had training from the DOR that requires them to have an answer to this question.  The fact that there IS NO DEBT doesn't matter. This means that if you don't check this box you will stand a 66% chance of having the filing rejected (again, the one recorded on the first try didn't have the box checked)

#3 - Finally - in case you have a vacant lot that has been used as a garden or just extra land, the appropriate drop down code is 91 - UNDEVELOPED LAND (land only).

I actually sought this question out because I wasn't sure what they meant by undeveloped.....but given that this was the only item that dealt with land that had no structures showing, I guessed correctly (as verified through call to DOR before the other rejections).

I share this in hopes that my migraine and subsequent battle may help others in their pursuits of Recording adventures!

Happy Friday to you,

Brent

Brent Williams-Ruth (pronouns: he/him)

Attorney-At-Law

Law Offices of Brent Williams-Ruth, a division of BWR Consulting, PLLC

Physical Address: 500 S 336th Street, Suite 214; Federal Way, WA 98003

Mailing Address: PO BOX 3319; Federal Way, WA 98063

Office/Scheduling Phone: (253) 285-7751

For All Meetings & Scheduling: info at williams-ruthlaw.com<mailto:info at williams-ruthlaw.com>

e-mail<mailto:Brent at Williams-RuthLaw.com> / website<http://www.williams-ruthlaw.com/> / facebook<http://www.facebook.com/bwrlaw> /
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20240513/294789e3/attachment.html>