Wash. Rev. Code » Title 59 · Chapter 59.18
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630 (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 eviction moratorium instituted by the governor of the state of Washington's proclamation 20-19.6 shall end on June 30, 2021.
(2) If a tenant has remaining unpaid rent that accrued between March 1, 2020, and six months following the expiration of the eviction moratorium or the end of the public health emergency, whichever is greater, the landlord must offer the tenant a reasonable schedule for repayment of the unpaid rent that does not exceed monthly payments equal to one-third of the monthly rental charges during the period of accrued debt. If a tenant fails to accept the terms of a reasonable repayment plan within 14 days of the landlord's offer, the landlord may proceed with an unlawful detainer action as set forth in RCW 59.12.030(3) but subject to any requirements under the eviction resolution pilot program established under *RCW 59.18.660. If the tenant defaults on any rent owed under a repayment plan, the landlord may apply for reimbursement from the landlord mitigation program as authorized under **RCW 43.31.605(1)(d) or proceed with an unlawful detainer action as set forth in RCW 59.12.030(3) but subject to any requirements under the eviction resolution pilot program established under *RCW 59.18.660. The court must consider the tenant's circumstances, including decreased income or increased expenses due to COVID-19, and the repayment plan terms offered during any unlawful detainer proceeding.
(3) Any repayment plan entered into under this section must:
(a) Not require payment until 30 days after the repayment plan is offered to the tenant;
(b) Cover rent only and not any late fees, attorneys' fees, or any other fees and charges;
(c) Allow for payments from any source of income as defined in RCW 59.18.255(5) or from pledges by nonprofit organizations, churches, religious institutions, or governmental entities; and
(d) Not include provisions or be conditioned on: The tenant's compliance with the rental agreement, payment of attorneys' fees, court costs, or other costs related to litigation if the tenant defaults on the rental agreement; a requirement that the tenant apply for governmental benefits or provide proof of receipt of governmental benefits; or the tenant's waiver of any rights to a notice under RCW 59.12.030 or related provisions before a writ of restitution is issued.
(4) It is a defense to an eviction under RCW 59.12.030(3) that a landlord did not offer a repayment plan in conformity with this section.
(5) To the extent available funds exist for rental assistance from a federal, state, local, private, or nonprofit program, the tenant or landlord may continue to seek rental assistance to reduce and/or eliminate the unpaid rent balance.
[ 2021 c 115 s 4.]

Notes:

Reviser's note: *(1) RCW 59.18.660 expired July 1, 2023.
**(2) RCW 43.31.605 was amended by 2022 c 196 s 2, changing subsection (1)(d) to subsection (1)(c).
Conflicting laws—2021 c 115 ss 2-4: See note following RCW 59.18.620.
Finding—Intent—Application—Effective date—2021 c 115: See notes following RCW 59.18.620.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2022–2025 · leading case: Gonzales v. Inslee, 535 P.3d 864 (Wash. 2023).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gonzales v. Inslee, 535 P.3d 864 (Wash. 2023). “115 §§ 4-5; RCW 59.18.630; RCW 43.31.605. The eviction moratorium never relieved tenants of the obligation to pay rent.”
Weidner Prop. Mgmt., LLC v. Brian Cutsforth (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 29× “410(2), however, an older statute, does not require the landlord to agree to new lease terms as a condition to accepting rent payments from an emergency rental assistance program.”
Gene & Susan Gonzales, V. Jay Inslee & State Of Wa, 504 P.3d 890 (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “RCW 59.18.630. E2SSB 5160 provided a number of protections for tenants, including that landlords must offer tenants a reasonable schedule for repayment of unpaid rent accruing between March 1, 2020 and six months after expiration of the eviction moratorium.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 9× “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
Rental Hous. Assoc., App/x-resps V. City Of Seattle, Resp/x-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 7× “Payment Plan Ordinance The Landlords next argue that the newly enacted state repayment plan statute, codified in RCW 59.18.630, conflicts with and preempts the payment plan requirement contained in Ordinance 126081.”
Washington & Rice, LLC v. Robert Stallworth, et ux (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 7× “94 in back rent when Washington and Rice failed to offer the Stallworths a rent reduction or a payment plan as required by former RCW 59.18.630 (2021) and RCW 59.21.030(3).”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 6× “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(1) — 2 cases
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(2) — 3 cases
Rental Hous. Assoc., App/x-resps V. City Of Seattle, Resp/x-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “Payment Plan Ordinance The Landlords next argue that the newly enacted state repayment plan statute, codified in RCW 59.18.630, conflicts with and preempts the payment plan requirement contained in Ordinance 126081.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(3) — 1 case
Rental Hous. Assoc., App/x-resps V. City Of Seattle, Resp/x-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “Payment Plan Ordinance The Landlords next argue that the newly enacted state repayment plan statute, codified in RCW 59.18.630, conflicts with and preempts the payment plan requirement contained in Ordinance 126081.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(3)(a) — 1 case
Rental Hous. Assoc., App/x-resps V. City Of Seattle, Resp/x-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “Payment Plan Ordinance The Landlords next argue that the newly enacted state repayment plan statute, codified in RCW 59.18.630, conflicts with and preempts the payment plan requirement contained in Ordinance 126081.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(3)(b) — 1 case
Washington & Rice, LLC v. Robert Stallworth, et ux (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “94 in back rent when Washington and Rice failed to offer the Stallworths a rent reduction or a payment plan as required by former RCW 59.18.630 (2021) and RCW 59.21.030(3).”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(3)(c) — 3 cases
Weidner Prop. Mgmt., LLC v. Brian Cutsforth (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “410(2), however, an older statute, does not require the landlord to agree to new lease terms as a condition to accepting rent payments from an emergency rental assistance program.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
Julie Marie Heston v. Ed L. Christensen (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 59.18.630 regulated the actions of landlords during the Governor’s eviction moratorium.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.630(4) — 1 case
Rental Hous. Assoc., App/x-resps V. City Of Seattle, Resp/x-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “Payment Plan Ordinance The Landlords next argue that the newly enacted state repayment plan statute, codified in RCW 59.18.630, conflicts with and preempts the payment plan requirement contained in Ordinance 126081.”
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.