Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 59.20.220 (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) If a court or an arbitrator determines that:

(a) A landlord has failed to carry out a duty or duties imposed by RCW 59.20.130; and

(b) A reasonable time has passed for the landlord to remedy the defective condition following notice to the landlord under RCW 59.20.200 or such other time as may be allotted by the court or arbitrator; the court or arbitrator may determine the diminution in rental value of the property due to the defective condition and shall render judgment against the landlord for the rent paid in excess of such diminished rental value from the time of notice of such defect to the time of decision and any costs of repair done pursuant to RCW 59.20.210 for which no deduction has been previously made. Such decisions may be enforced as other judgments at law and shall be available to the tenant as a set-off against any existing or subsequent claims of the landlord.

The court or arbitrator may also authorize the tenant to contract to make further corrective repairs. The court or arbitrator shall specify a time period in which the landlord may make such repairs before the tenant may contract for such repairs. Such repairs shall not exceed the sum expressed in dollars representing one month's rental of the tenant's mobile home space in any one calendar year.

(2) The tenant shall not be obligated to pay rent in excess of the diminished rental value of the mobile home space until such defect or defects are corrected by the landlord or until the court or arbitrator determines otherwise.

[ 1999 c 359 s 17; 1984 c 58 s 9.]

Notes:

Severability—1984 c 58: See note following RCW 59.20.200.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1998–2006 · leading case: Ethridge v. Hwang, 20 P.3d 958 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ethridge v. Hwang, 20 P.3d 958 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “210 and RCW 59.20.220, and Ethridge did not seek these remedies.”

Holiday Resort Cmty. Ass'n v. Echo Lake Assocs., L.L.C., 135 P.3d 499 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “RCW 59.20.220 provides for an award of fees in “any action arising out of’ the MHLTA.”

White River Estates v. Hiltbruner, 953 P.2d 796 (Wash. 1998). “073, and the MHLTA, in general, neither authorize nor prohibit damages for emotional distress.”

White River Estates v. Hiltbruner, 134 Wash. 2d 761 (Wash. 1998). “073, and the MHLTA, in general, neither authorize nor prohibit damages for emotional distress. White River argues, however, *766 that the statute clearly provides damages for “costs of repairs,” RCW 59.”

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.