Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.16
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.16.110 (2026)

License required

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No person shall act, assume to act, or advertise as a collection agency or out-of-state collection agency as defined in this chapter, except as authorized by this chapter, without first having applied for and obtained a license from the director.
Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to require a regular employee of a collection agency or out-of-state collection agency duly licensed under this chapter to procure a collection agency license.
[ 1994 c 195 s 2; 1971 ex.s. c 253 s 2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Gray v. Suttell & Assocs., 334 P.3d 14 (Wash. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gray v. Suttell & Assocs., 334 P.3d 14 (Wash. 2014). · cites it 11× “RCW 19.16.110 (no person shall act as a collection agency without first having applied for and obtained a license).”
Moritz v. Daniel N. Gordon, P.C., 895 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (W.D. Wash. 2012). · cites it 9× “In particular, the WCAA states: The operation of a collection agency or out-of-state collection agency without a license as prohibited by RCW 19.16.110 and the commission by a licensee or an employee of a licensee of an act or practice prohibited by RCW 19.”
Paris v. Steinberg & Steinberg, 828 F. Supp. 2d 1212 (W.D. Wash. 2011). · cites it 6× “All persons located in Washington against whom, within one year before the date of this complaint, Defendants brought or maintained an action in a court of this state involving the collection of a claim of a third party without alleging and proving that Defendants are duly…”
Mandelas v. Daniel N. Gordon, PC, 785 F. Supp. 2d 951 (W.D. Wash. 2011). · cites it 3× “250(14); by failing to provide notice of the writ of garnishment as required under state law; 5 and by conducting collection activities and bringing an action in a Washington state court without being licensed as a collection agency in violation of RCW 19.16.110 and RCW…”
Watkins v. Peterson Enter., Inc., 57 F. Supp. 2d 1102 (E.D. Wash. 1999). “440 states: The operation of a collection agency or out-of-state collection agency without a license as prohibited by RCW 19.16.110 and the commission by a licensee or an employee of a licensee of an act or practice prohibited by RCW 19,16.”
Fireside Bank fka Fireside Thrift Co. v. John W. Askins & Lisa D. Askins, 430 P.3d 1145 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “Violations of these two statutes are actionable under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA), ch. 19.86 RCW.”
Marquez Vargas v. RRA CP Opportunity Trust 1 (W.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 7× “§§ 1692e, 1692e(2), 13 1692e(5), 1692e(10), 1692d(4), 1692f, 1692f(1), and 1692f(6); Washington’s Collection Agency 14 Act (the “WCAA”), Wash. Rev. Code §§ 19.16.110 , 19.16.250(15), 19.”
State Of Wa Ex Rel. Larry M. Kasoff, App. V. Harris & Harris, Ltd., Res. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “The court determined that Harris had “substantially complied with Washington State’s collection agency licensing statutes (RCW 19.16.110 in particular)” and that Kasoff “failed to address this issue in his opposition and is deemed to have conceded this point.”
Aliona Kosovan, V. Omni Ins. Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “Second, Kosovan argues that Praxis engaged in an unfair trade practice when it attempted to collect on the subrogation claim without obtaining a license to operate as a collection agency in Washington as required under RCW 19.16.110 within the Collection Agency Act (CAA).”
John Somarakis, Tr., V U.s. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “RCW 19.16.110; RCW 19.16.250(1). A “collection agency” is defined as “[a]ny person directly or indirectly engaged in soliciting claims for collection, or collecting or attempting to collect claims owed or due or asserted to be owed or due to another person.”
Laura Daniels, V George Sommers (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “First, they argued that Sommers and/or Swanson violated the CPA by (1) acting as a debt collection agency without a license in violation of RCW 19.16.110; (2) failing to follow the requirements in chapter 6.”
Frias v. Patenaude & Felix APC (W.D. Wash. 2021). · cites it 2× “See Wash. Rev. Code § 19.16.110 . 5 Therefore, these provisions apply to P&F, and the Court must determine whether the conduct 6 Mr.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
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.