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

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.16.450 (2026)

Violation of RCW 19.16.250 or 19.16.260—Additional penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
If an act or practice in violation of RCW 19.16.250 or 19.16.260 is committed by a licensee or an employee of a licensee in the collection of a claim, neither the licensee, the customer of the licensee, nor any other person who may thereafter legally seek to collect on such claim shall ever be allowed to recover any interest, service charge, attorneys' fees, collection costs, delinquency charge, or any other fees or charges otherwise legally chargeable to the debtor on such claim: PROVIDED, That any person asserting the claim may nevertheless recover from the debtor the amount of the original claim or obligation.
[ 2020 c 30 s 4; 1971 ex.s. c 253 s 36.]

Notes:

Application—2020 c 30: See note following RCW 19.16.100.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Fireside Bank v. Askins, 460 P.3d 157 (Wash. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fireside Bank v. Askins, 460 P.3d 157 (Wash. 2020). · cites it 17× “Based on these alleged violations, the Askinses asserted that RCW 19.16.450 precluded Cavalry from collecting any amount exceeding the original principal of the judgment, $7,754.”
Strenge v. Clarke, 569 P.2d 60 (Wash. 1977). · cites it 4× “But, acting pursuant to RCW 19.16.450 [2] the court properly refused to award respondent any sum for court costs, collection costs, attorney's fees, or other costs, or interest.”
Walcker v. SN Com., LLC, 286 F. App'x 455 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 8× “*457 Wash. Rev.Code § 19.16.450 provides the penalty for violations of Wash.”
Fireside Bank fka Fireside Thrift Co. v. John W. Askins & Lisa D. Askins, 430 P.3d 1145 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “He ordered the judgment stripped to its principal pursuant to RCW 19.16.450 and declared the judgment satisfied.”
Larry M. Kasoff, App. v. Ccb Credit Svc., Inc., Resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 6× “2 Former RCW 19.16.450 (2010) specifies, "If an act or practice in violation of RCW 19.”
Creager v. Columbia Debt Recovery LLC (W.D. Wash. 2022). · cites it 2× “, RCW § 19.16.450, and therefore, 5 representing to a debtor that she owes interest not lawfully charged can constitute a violation.”
EGP Investments, LLC v. Marvin R. Frear Jr., et ux (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 19.16.450. In Askins, we recently concluded that a party cannot assert a collection agency act claim as a defense to a collection action.”
Creager v. Columbia Debt Recovery LLC (W.D. Wash. 2021). “, RCW 19.16.450. 11 2021 WL 952559 , at *4.”
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.