<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Ultimately, it will take practitioners talking to their legislators and bringing up these matters. Those of us on the EC of the RPPT section have found it difficult to be able to “weigh in” on behalf of the WSBA because of the restrictions
on working on anything (overly simplified) outside the “practice of law.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Please note our new website and email address as of 1/1/21.<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Chris Benis<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">First Avenue Law Group, PLLC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">321 First Avenue West, Seattle, WA 98119<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">206.447-1900 office – 206.447.9075 fax – www. firstavenuelaw.com
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained
in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb@firstavenuelaw.com, and delete this message. Thank you very much.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed
under federal tax law. Under recent IRS rules, a taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements under federal law. Please contact
me if you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to these new rules.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Kary Krismer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 12, 2022 3:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] HR 1951--Amendment to Seller Disclosure Statement<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>But for the statute eliminating the "don't know" it could be argued that a form with "don't know" is substantially similar. The statewide forms have added "n/a" and are presumably compliant.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>But this is F'n absurd! There are some questions I thought should be amended to eliminate "no" as a possible answer. For example does the property contain fill dirt. There is no way an owner who didn't see the property being developed would know it didn't
contain fill dirt, unless maybe someone told them.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>It may be that sellers will simply have to quit providing this form and risk a buyer backing out.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>A better solution would be to have greater explicit buyer rights to ask questions of improperly filled out questions. That would put more pressure on sellers to fill out forms correctly.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Finally, the legislature really needs to get someone who knows something to work on these issues. The change that just went into effect about internet service (which was hardly a pressing issue) requires the exact same answer for a property that has no
internet service available as one that doesn't currently subscribe to internet. How does that help the buyer?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>Kary L. Krismer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>206 723-2148<o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 1/12/2022 12:53 PM, Catherine Clark wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">All:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Have you seen this bill? It is currently in committee.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It proposes significant changes to the Seller’s Disclosure Statement (as currently exists in RCW 64.06).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Catherine “Cat” Clark<br>
Law Office of Catherine C. Clark PLLC</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">110 Prefontaine Place South, Ste. 304</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Seattle, WA 98104</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Phone: (206) 838-2528<br>
Cell: (206) 409-8938<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:cat@loccc.com"><span style="color:#0563C1">cat@loccc.com</span></a><br>
</span><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt">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.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>***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.***<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>WSBARP mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>