Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.144
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.144.080 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) It is unlawful for any person in connection with the mortgage lending process to directly or indirectly:
(a)(i) Employ any scheme, device, or artifice to defraud or materially mislead any borrower during the lending process; (ii) defraud or materially mislead any lender, defraud or materially mislead any person, or engage in any unfair or deceptive practice toward any person related to the mortgage lending process; or (iii) obtain property by fraud or material misrepresentation during the mortgage lending process;
(b) Knowingly make any misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission related to the mortgage lending process knowing that it may be relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party related to the mortgage lending process;
(c) Use or facilitate the use of any misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission, knowing the same to contain a misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission, related to the mortgage lending process with the intention that it be relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party related to the mortgage lending process;
(d) Receive any proceeds or anything of value in connection with a residential mortgage closing that such person knew resulted from a violation of subsection (1), (2), or (3) of this section [(a), (b), or (c) of this subsection];
(e) File or cause to be filed with the county recorder or the official registrar of deeds of any county of this state any document such person knows to contain a material misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission;
(f) Violate RCW 31.04.297(3); or
(g) Knowingly alter, destroy, shred, mutilate, or conceal a record, document, or other object, or attempt to do so, with the intent to impair the investigation and prosecution of this crime.
(2) Each crime prosecuted under this section shall be punished separately under chapter 9.94A RCW, unless it is the same criminal conduct as any other crime under RCW 9.94A.589.
(3) Every person who, in the commission of mortgage fraud as described in this section, commits any other crime may be punished for that other crime in addition to mortgage fraud, and may be prosecuted for each crime separately.
[ 2015 c 229 s 3; 2010 c 35 s 12; 2008 c 108 s 9.]

Notes:

Effective date—2010 c 35: See RCW 31.04.904.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2012–2019 · leading case: State v. Merritt, 434 P.3d 1016 (Wash. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Merritt, 434 P.3d 1016 (Wash. 2019). · cites it 4× “ement, misrepresentation, or omission, during the mortgage lending process with the intention that it be relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party to the mortgage lending process, to-wit: Kirk Lakey; and (4)knowingly receive any proceeds or anything of value…”
Hummel v. Nw. Tr. Servs., Inc., 180 F. Supp. 3d 798 (W.D. Wash. 2016). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff does not dispute this point, instead arguing that she is bringing some sort of distinct claim for a violation of RCW 19.144.080. See Dkt. # 72 at -8; Dkt.”
Westcott v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 862 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (W.D. Wash. 2012). “Plaintiffs’ citation to RCW 19.144.080, which sets forth certain practices by mortgage brokers or lenders as unlawful, is similarly unavailing.”
Saepoff v. North Cascade Tr. Servs., Inc (W.D. Wash. 2019). · cites it 7× “18; see RCW 19.144.080. Third, she alleges that Ocwen violated Washington’s 13 Consumer Loan Act (“CLA”).”
State Of Washington v. Diana Joline Merritt (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “isrepresentation, or omission, during the mortgage lending process with the intention that it be relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party to the mortgage lending process, to-wit: [borrower’ name]; and (4) knowingly receive any proceeds or anything of value in…”
Basil D. Bena, Resp/cross-app. v. Nathan B. Schleicher & Mary L. Schleicher, App/cross-resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “In this case, the $100,000 promissory note and mortgage were related to Schleichers’ alleged mortgage fraud only to the extent that they needed the promissory note and mortgage to “go away” in order to obtain financing after they failed to disclose the promissory note and…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 19.144.080(1)(a) — 1 case
State Of Washington v. Diana Joline Merritt (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “isrepresentation, or omission, during the mortgage lending process with the intention that it be relied on by a mortgage lender, borrower, or any other party to the mortgage lending process, to-wit: [borrower’ name]; and (4) knowingly receive any proceeds or anything of value in…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 19.144.080(e) — 1 case
Saepoff v. North Cascade Tr. Servs., Inc (W.D. Wash. 2019). “18; see RCW 19.144.080. Third, she alleges that Ocwen violated Washington’s 13 Consumer Loan Act (“CLA”).”
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.