Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010 (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) No person engaged in the business of insurance shall engage in unfair methods of competition or in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of such business as such methods, acts, or practices are defined pursuant to subsection (2) of this section.

(2) In addition to such unfair methods and unfair or deceptive acts or practices as are expressly defined and prohibited by this code, the commissioner may from time to time by regulation promulgated pursuant to chapter 34.05 RCW, define other methods of competition and other acts and practices in the conduct of such business reasonably found by the commissioner to be unfair or deceptive after a review of all comments received during the notice and comment rule-making period.

(3)(a) In defining other methods of competition and other acts and practices in the conduct of such business to be unfair or deceptive, and after reviewing all comments and documents received during the notice and comment rule-making period, the commissioner shall identify his or her reasons for defining the method of competition or other act or practice in the conduct of insurance to be unfair or deceptive and shall include a statement outlining these reasons as part of the adopted rule.

(b) The commissioner shall include a detailed description of facts upon which he or she relied and of facts upon which he or she failed to rely, in defining the method of competition or other act or practice in the conduct of insurance to be unfair or deceptive, in the concise explanatory statement prepared under RCW 34.05.325(6).

(c) Upon appeal the superior court shall review the findings of fact upon which the regulation is based de novo on the record.

(4) No such regulation shall be made effective prior to the expiration of thirty days after the date of the order by which it is promulgated.

(5) If the commissioner has cause to believe that any person is violating any such regulation, the commissioner may order such person to cease and desist therefrom. The commissioner shall deliver such order to such person direct or mail it to the person by registered mail with return receipt requested. If the person violates the order after expiration of ten days after the cease and desist order has been received by him or her, he or she may be fined by the commissioner a sum not to exceed two hundred and fifty dollars for each violation committed thereafter.

(6) If any such regulation is violated, the commissioner may take such other or additional action as is permitted under the insurance code for violation of a regulation.

(7) An insurer engaged in the business of insurance may not unreasonably deny a claim for coverage or payment of benefits to any first party claimant. "First party claimant" has the same meaning as in RCW 48.30.015.

[ 2007 c 498 s 2 (Referendum Measure No. 67, approved November 6, 2007); 1997 c 409 s 107; 1985 c 264 s 13; 1973 1st ex.s. c 152 s 6; 1965 ex.s. c 70 s 24; 1947 c 79 s .30.01; Rem. Supp. 1947 s 45.30.01.]

Notes:

Short title—2007 c 498: See note following RCW 48.30.015.

Part headings—Severability—1997 c 409: See notes following RCW 43.22.051.

Severability—1973 1st ex.s. c 152: See note following RCW 48.05.140.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 137 cases (31 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Indus. Indem. Co. of Nw., Inc. v. Kallevig, 792 P.2d 520 (Wash. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Indus. Indem. Co. of Nw., Inc. v. Kallevig, 792 P.2d 520 (Wash. 1990). · cites it 24× “RCW 48.30.010 prohibits insurers from engaging in unfair trade practices.”

Tank v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 715 P.2d 1133 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 8× “In addition, the Insurance Commissioner, pursuant to legislative authority under RCW 48.30.010, has promulgated regulations defining specific acts and practices which constitute a breach of an insurer's duty of good faith.”

Omega Nat'l Ins. v. Marquardt, 799 P.2d 235 (Wash. 1990). · cites it 13× “*421 The Commissioner concluded that such policies (particularly the intensively mass-marketed small policies targeting older citizens) produced an unfair result and should be a prohibited practice under RCW 48.30.010. Omega and Pierce National Life Insurance Company filed a…”

Perez-Crisantos v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 389 P.3d 476 (Wash. 2017). · cites it 4× “¶11 The regulations in question are long standing and have long been enforceable by the insurance commissioner *678 and, in some cases, by first party insureds in bad faith or CPA actions.”

Federated Am. Ins. v. Strong, 689 P.2d 68 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 13× “RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any person in the business of insurance to engage in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of such business, as such acts or practices are defined pursuant to RCW 48.”

Sarah Gosney, Res/cross-apps. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., Apps/cross-res., 419 P.3d 447 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 6× “The language of RCW 48.30.010 is plain and unambiguous. RCW 48.”

Anderson v. State Farm Mut. Ins., 101 Wash. App. 323 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 7× “An insurance statute, RCW 48.30.010, prohibits insurers from engaging in unfair or deceptive claims practices.”

Leingang v. Pierce Co. Med. Bureau, Inc., 930 P.2d 288 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 4× “Leingang also argues that the use of the automobile insurance exclusion was unfair in that the insurer failed to make a reasonable investigation of the legal validity of the exclusion.”

Anderson v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 2 P.3d 1029 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “An insurance statute, RCW 48.30.010, prohibits insurers from engaging in unfair or deceptive claims practices.”

Leingang v. Pierce Cnty. Med. Bureau, Inc., 131 Wash. 2d 133 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 4× “Insurance Regulations RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any insurer from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of the insurance business, as such acts or practices are defined in RCW 48.”

Villella v. Pub. Employees Mut. Ins., 725 P.2d 957 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 5× “RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any person in the business of insurance to engage in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of such business, as such acts or practices are defined pursuant to RCW 48.”

Escalante v. Sentry Ins., 743 P.2d 832 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “010 and the relevant WAC regulations in isolation suggests that in creating this regulatory scheme the Legislature and the Insurance Commissioner did not intend to provide protection or remedies for individual interests, but rather only intended to create a regulatory mechanism…”

Show all 137 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010(1) — 40 cases

Indus. Indem. Co. of Nw., Inc. v. Kallevig, 792 P.2d 520 (Wash. 1990). “RCW 48.30.010 prohibits insurers from engaging in unfair trade practices.”

Villella v. Pub. Employees Mut. Ins., 725 P.2d 957 (Wash. 1986). “RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any person in the business of insurance to engage in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of such business, as such acts or practices are defined pursuant to RCW 48.”

Perez-Crisantos v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 389 P.3d 476 (Wash. 2017). “¶11 The regulations in question are long standing and have long been enforceable by the insurance commissioner *678 and, in some cases, by first party insureds in bad faith or CPA actions.”

Panag v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, 204 P.3d 885 (Wash. 2009).

Federated Am. Ins. v. Strong, 689 P.2d 68 (Wash. 1984). “RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any person in the business of insurance to engage in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of such business, as such acts or practices are defined pursuant to RCW 48.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010(2) — 25 cases

Omega Nat'l Ins. v. Marquardt, 799 P.2d 235 (Wash. 1990). “*421 The Commissioner concluded that such policies (particularly the intensively mass-marketed small policies targeting older citizens) produced an unfair result and should be a prohibited practice under RCW 48.30.010. Omega and Pierce National Life Insurance Company filed a…”

Leingang v. Pierce Co. Med. Bureau, Inc., 930 P.2d 288 (Wash. 1997). “Leingang also argues that the use of the automobile insurance exclusion was unfair in that the insurer failed to make a reasonable investigation of the legal validity of the exclusion.”

Leingang v. Pierce Cnty. Med. Bureau, Inc., 131 Wash. 2d 133 (Wash. 1997). “Insurance Regulations RCW 48.30.010(1) prohibits any insurer from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of the insurance business, as such acts or practices are defined in RCW 48.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010(5) — 2 cases

Certif. From US for Ninth Cir. v. Kachman, 198 P.3d 505 (Wash. 2008).

Cornhusker Cas. Ins. v. Kachman, 165 Wash. 2d 404 (Wash. 2008).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010(7) — 7 cases

Gail Michelman v. Lincoln Nat'l Life Insuranc, 685 F.3d 887 (9th Cir. 2012).

Payton O. Hoff v. Safeco Ins. Co. Of Illinois (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

Perez-Crisantos v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (Wash. 2017).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.30.010(l) — 1 case

Peoples v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n (Wash. 2019).

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.