Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 31.04.247 (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) The director must issue and deliver a mortgage loan originator license if, after investigation, the director makes at a minimum the following findings:
(a) The applicant has paid the required license fees;
(b) The applicant has met the requirements of this chapter;
(c) The applicant has never had a mortgage loan originator license revoked in any governmental jurisdiction, except that, for the purposes of this subsection, a subsequent formal vacation of such revocation is not a revocation;
(d) The applicant has not been convicted of a gross misdemeanor involving dishonesty or financial misconduct or has not been convicted of, or pled guilty or nolo contendere to, a felony in a domestic, foreign, or military court (i) during the seven-year period preceding the date of the application for licensing and registration; or (ii) at any time preceding the date of application, if the felony involved an act of fraud, dishonesty, breach of trust, or money laundering;
(e) The applicant has demonstrated financial responsibility, character, and general fitness such as to command the confidence of the community and to warrant a determination that the mortgage loan originator will operate honestly, fairly, and efficiently within the purposes of chapter 120, Laws of 2009. For the purposes of this section, an applicant has not demonstrated financial responsibility when the applicant shows disregard in the management of his or her financial condition. A determination that an individual has shown disregard in the management of his or her financial condition may include, but is not limited to, an assessment of: Current outstanding judgments, except judgments solely as a result of medical expenses; current outstanding tax liens or other government liens and filings; foreclosures within the last three years; or a pattern of seriously delinquent accounts within the past three years;
(f) The applicant has completed the prelicensing education requirement as required by this chapter;
(g) The applicant has passed a written test that meets the test requirement as required by this chapter;
(h) The consumer loan licensee that the applicant works for has met the surety bond requirement as required by this chapter;
(i) The applicant has not been found to be in violation of this chapter or rules adopted under this chapter;
(j) The mortgage loan originator licensee has completed, during the calendar year preceding a licensee's annual license renewal date, continuing education as required by this chapter.
(2) If the director finds the conditions of this section have not been met, the director must not issue the mortgage loan originator license. The director must notify the applicant of the denial and return to the mortgage loan originator applicant any remaining portion of the license fee that exceeds the department's actual cost to investigate the license.
Notes:
Findings—Declaration—2009 c 120: See note following RCW 31.04.015.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case (1 in the last 5 years), 2023–2023 · leading case: Trang Huynh Nguyen, V. Becky Hoang, Et Ano (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
Trang Huynh Nguyen, V. Becky Hoang, Et Ano (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “The charges state that “Respondent Hoang fails to meet the requirements of RCW 31.04.247(1)(e) by failing to demonstrate character and general fitness such as to command the confidence of the community and to warrant a belief that mortgage loan originator[s] will operate…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 31.04.247(1)(e) — 1 case
Trang Huynh Nguyen, V. Becky Hoang, Et Ano (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “The charges state that “Respondent Hoang fails to meet the requirements of RCW 31.04.247(1)(e) by failing to demonstrate character and general fitness such as to command the confidence of the community and to warrant a belief that mortgage loan originator[s] will operate…”
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.