Wash. Rev. Code » Title 18 · Chapter 18.140
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 18.140.160 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
In addition to the unprofessional conduct described in RCW 18.235.130, the director may take disciplinary action for the following conduct, acts, or conditions:
(1) Failing to meet the minimum qualifications for state certification, licensure, or registration established by or pursuant to this chapter;
(2) Paying money other than the fees provided for by this chapter to any employee of the director or the commission to procure state certification, licensure, or registration under this chapter;
(3) Continuing to act as a state-certified real estate appraiser, state-licensed real estate appraiser, or state-registered appraiser trainee when his or her certificate, license, or registration is on an expired or inactive status;
(4) Violating any provision of this chapter or any lawful rule made by the director pursuant thereto;
(5) Issuing an appraisal report on any real property in which the appraiser has an interest unless his or her interest is clearly stated in the appraisal report;
(6) Being affiliated as an employer, independent contractor, or supervisory appraiser of a state-certified real estate appraiser, state-licensed real estate appraiser, or state-registered appraiser trainee whose certification, license, or registration is currently in a suspended or revoked status;
(7) Failure or refusal without good cause to exercise reasonable diligence in performing an appraisal practice under this chapter, including preparing an oral or written report to communicate information concerning an appraisal practice; and
(8) Negligence or incompetence in performing an appraisal practice under this chapter, including preparing an oral or written report to communicate information concerning an appraisal practice.
[ 2019 c 51 s 3; 2007 c 256 s 1; 2005 c 339 s 14; 2002 c 86 s 239; 2000 c 35 s 1; 1996 c 182 s 9; 1993 c 30 s 17; 1989 c 414 s 20.]

Notes:

Effective date—2019 c 51: See note following RCW 18.140.130.
Effective dates—2005 c 339: See note following RCW 18.140.005.
Effective dates—2002 c 86: See note following RCW 18.08.340.
Part headings not law—Severability—2002 c 86: See RCW 18.235.902 and 18.235.903.
Effective dates—1996 c 182: See note following RCW 18.140.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2001–2001 · leading case: Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 11× “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser’s ultimate determination of value.”
Eidson v. State, Dept. of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 13× “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser's ultimate determination of value.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 18.140.160(2) — 2 cases
Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser’s ultimate determination of value.”
Eidson v. State, Dept. of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser's ultimate determination of value.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 18.140.160(6) — 2 cases
Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser’s ultimate determination of value.”
Eidson v. State, Dept. of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser's ultimate determination of value.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 18.140.160(7) — 2 cases
Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser’s ultimate determination of value.”
Eidson v. State, Dept. of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser's ultimate determination of value.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 18.140.160(9) — 2 cases
Eidson v. Dep't of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser’s ultimate determination of value.”
Eidson v. State, Dept. of Licensing, 32 P.3d 1039 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Nothing in RCW 18.140.160 indicates that in order to warrant sanctions, the conduct that forms the basis of the sanction must have affected the appraiser's ultimate determination of value.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.