Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.52
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.52.010 (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) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, every loan or forbearance of money, goods, or thing in action shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum where no different rate is agreed to in writing between the parties: PROVIDED, That with regard to any transaction heretofore or hereafter entered into subject to this section, if an agreement in writing between the parties evidencing such transaction provides for the payment of money at the end of an agreed period of time or in installments over an agreed period of time, then such agreement shall constitute a writing for purposes of this section and satisfy the requirements thereof. The discounting of commercial paper, where the borrower makes himself or herself liable as maker, guarantor, or indorser, shall be considered as a loan for the purposes of this chapter.
(2)(a) Prejudgment interest charged or collected on medical debt, as defined in RCW 19.16.100, must not exceed nine percent.
(b) For any medical debt for which prejudgment interest has accrued or may be accruing as of July 28, 2019, no prejudgment interest in excess of nine percent shall accrue thereafter.
(3) A lease shall not be considered a loan or forbearance for the purposes of this chapter if:
(a) It constitutes a "consumer lease" as defined in RCW 63.10.020;
(b) It constitutes a lease-purchase agreement under chapter 63.19 RCW; or
(c) It would constitute such "consumer lease" but for the fact that:
(i) The lessee was not a natural person;
(ii) The lease was not primarily for personal, family, or household purposes; or
(iii) The total contractual obligation exceeded twenty-five thousand dollars.
[ 2019 c 227 s 5; 2011 c 336 s 542; 1992 c 134 s 13. Prior: 1983 c 309 s 1; 1983 c 158 s 6; 1981 c 80 s 1; 1899 c 80 s 1; RRS s 7299; prior: 1895 c 136 s 1; 1893 c 20 s 1; Code 1881 s 2368; 1863 p 433 s 1; 1854 p 380 s 1.]

Notes:

Short title—1992 c 134: See RCW 63.19.900.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77 cases (14 in the last 5 years), 1956–2026 · leading case: Hill v. Garda CL Nw., Inc., 424 P.3d 207 (Wash. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hill v. Garda CL Nw., Inc., 424 P.3d 207 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 7× “We also hold that aggrieved workers may recover both double exemplary damages under RCW 49.”
Wright v. Dave Johnson Ins. Inc., 275 P.3d 339 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “3d 814 (2004), our *776 Supreme Court held that RCW 19.52.010 9 mandates 12 percent prejudgment interest when the parties have not agreed on some other rate.”
Topline Equip., Inc. v. Stan Witty Land, Inc., 639 P.2d 825 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 8× “The trial court limited Topline's interest rate to 6 percent per annum pursuant to RCW 19.52.010, but refused to impose the usury penalties provided for in RCW 19.”
Shelcon Constr. Grp., LLC v. Haymond, 351 P.3d 895 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 6× “” The statute does not expressly state whether a signature is required. Haymond argues that the trial court’s finding that the contract providing for 18 percent interest was “executed by the conduct of the parties” is error under RCW 19.”
TJ Landco, LLC v. Harley C. Douglass, Inc., 346 P.3d 777 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 5× “2d 92 (1985) (“The rate of prejudgment interest is governed by RCW 19.52.010.”); Thomas v. Ruddell Lease-Sales, Inc.”
Austin v. U.S. Bank, 869 P.2d 404 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 3× “Bank a choice between agreeing to pay 12 percent statutory interest (presumably pursuant to RCW 19.52.010), or 9 percent simple interest.”
Nat'l Bank of Com. v. Thomsen, 495 P.2d 332 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 4× “[3] That statute, as I see it, should have been read then and should be read now in pari materia with RCW 19.52.010, which says: Every loan or forbearance of money, goods, or thing in action shall bear interest at the rate of six percent per annum where no different rate is…”
Stratton v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 770 F.3d 443 (6th Cir. 2014). “020 ; see also Wash. Rev. Code § 19.52.010 . As a result, courts construing such statutes may determine that the particular state regime does not treat creditors so strictly after they waive a contractual rate of interest.”
Mehlenbacher v. DeMont, 11 P.3d 871 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “010 states: "(1) Every loan for forbearance of money, goods, or thing in action shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum where no different rate is agreed to in writing between the parties." Here, the note does not contain a written term for a default interest…”
Mehlenbacher v. DeMont, 103 Wash. App. 240 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “010 states: “(1) Every loan or forbearance of money, goods, or thing in action shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum where no different rate is agreed to in writing between the parties.”
Cultum v. Heritage House Realtors, Inc., 694 P.2d 630 (Wash. 1985). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Heritage argues that the rate of interest used by the trial judge should have been 6 percent as authorized at the time by RCW 19.52.010. This statute only applies to loans or forbearance of money, goods or things in action.”
Bailie Commc'ns, Ltd. v. Trend Bus. Sys., Inc., 810 P.2d 12 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “4 Contrary to Bailies' assertions on appeal, RCW 19.52.010, which provides in pertinent part: (1) Every loan or forbearance of money, goods, or thing in action shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum where no different rate is agreed to in writing between the…”
Show all 77 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 19.52.010(1) — 20 cases
Wright v. Dave Johnson Ins. Inc., 275 P.3d 339 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “3d 814 (2004), our *776 Supreme Court held that RCW 19.52.010 9 mandates 12 percent prejudgment interest when the parties have not agreed on some other rate.”
TJ Landco, LLC v. Harley C. Douglass, Inc., 346 P.3d 777 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “2d 92 (1985) (“The rate of prejudgment interest is governed by RCW 19.52.010.”); Thomas v. Ruddell Lease-Sales, Inc.”
Shelcon Constr. Grp., LLC v. Haymond, 351 P.3d 895 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “” The statute does not expressly state whether a signature is required. Haymond argues that the trial court’s finding that the contract providing for 18 percent interest was “executed by the conduct of the parties” is error under RCW 19.”
Olympic Pipe Line Co. v. Thoeny, 124 Wash. App. 381 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
Arzola v. Name Intelligence, Inc., 355 P.3d 286 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
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.