Wash. Rev. Code » Title 46 · Chapter 46.29
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 46.29.060 (2026)

Application of sections requiring deposit of security and suspensions for failure to deposit security

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The provisions of this chapter, requiring deposit of security and suspensions for failure to deposit security, subject to certain exemptions, shall apply to the driver and owner of any vehicle of a type subject to registration under the motor vehicle laws of this state which is in any manner involved in an accident within this state, which accident has resulted in bodily injury or death of any person or damage to the property of any one person to an apparent extent equal to or greater than the minimum amount established by rule adopted by the director. The director shall adopt rules establishing the property damage threshold at which the provisions of this chapter apply with respect to the deposit of security and suspensions for failure to deposit security. Beginning October 1, 1987, the property damage threshold shall be five hundred dollars. The thresholds shall be revised when necessary, but not more frequently than every two years. The revisions shall only be for the purpose of recognizing economic changes as reflected by an inflationary index recommended by the office of financial management. The revisions shall be guided by the change in the index for the time period since the last revision and by the threshold established by the chief of the Washington state patrol for the filing of accident reports as provided in RCW 46.52.030.
[ 1987 c 463 s 1; 1977 ex.s. c 369 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 22 s 2; 1963 c 169 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1965–2007 · leading case: Progressive Cas. Ins. v. Jester, 683 P.2d 180 (Wash. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Progressive Cas. Ins. v. Jester, 683 P.2d 180 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 4× “RCW 46.29.060. Even after such an accident has occurred, proof of financial responsibility for the accident and in the future may be made in a number of ways, including, but not limited to, proof of liability insurance.”
Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. v. Wiscomb, 622 P.2d 1234 (Wash. 1980). · cites it 4× “" RCW 46.29.060, .080. In addition, the driver involved in such an accident must furnish proof of financial responsibility for the future.”
George v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, 23 P.3d 552 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “George's motor home is subject to registration under the motor vehicle laws of this state (RCW 46.29.060)[.]" The letter further informed Mr.”
George v. Farmers Ins., 106 Wash. App. 430 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “George’s motor home is subject to registration under the motor vehicle laws of this state (RCW 46.29.060)[.]” The letter further informed Mr.”
Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. v. Wiscomb, 643 P.2d 441 (Wash. 1982). “RCW 46.29.060. If such an accident occurs, the 2-pronged approach of the financial responsibility act comes into play.”
Sayan v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 716 P.2d 895 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “At the time of Sayan's accident, a driver involved in an automobile accident involving personal injury or property damage in excess of a certain amount, RCW 46.29.060, was required to deposit with the Department of Licensing proof of his ability to satisfy the damages likely to…”
Cary v. Allstate Ins., 922 P.2d 1335 (Wash. 1996). “The VCA provides that any person who has committed a criminal act which resulted in injury compensated under the statute may be required to reimburse the Department of Labor and Industries.”
Blackburn v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 697 P.2d 425 (Idaho 1985). “RCW 46.29.060. If such an accident occurs, the two-pronged approach of the financial responsibility act comes into play.”
Cary v. Allstate Ins. Co., 922 P.2d 1335 (Wash. 1996). “[28] See RCW 46.29.060 and RCW 46.29.250; see also Wiscomb, 97 Wash.”
Tibbs v. Johnson, 632 P.2d 904 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). “RCW 46.29.060, .070, .080, .170, and .420.”
LaPoint v. Richards, 403 P.2d 889 (Wash. 1965). “The sections of our statutes involved here (now re-codified as RCW 46.29.060 et. seq.), like their California counterpart, are directly intended for the benefit of owners and drivers of motor vehicles as a means of forestalling suspension of the license of the driver and of the…”
Shields v. Enter. Leasing Co., 161 P.3d 1068 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “RCW 46.29.060, .070, .250. One means of proving future financial responsibility is by filing a certificate of insurance showing the owner has a motor vehicle liability policy.”
Show all 16 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.