Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 6.23.090 (2026)

Rents and profits during period of redemption—Accounting—Option for reimbursement or extension on agricultural property

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section and in RCW 6.23.110, the purchaser, from the time of the sale until the redemption, and the redemptioner from the time of the redemption until another redemption, is entitled to receive from the tenant in possession the rents of the property sold or the value of the use and occupation thereof. But when any rents or profits have been received from the property by such purchaser or redemptioner, preceding the redemption thereof from him or her, the amount of such rents and profits, over and above the expenses paid for operating, caring for, protecting and insuring the property, shall be a credit upon the redemption money to be paid.
(2) If a redemptioner or other person entitled to redeem, before the expiration of the time allowed for such redemption, files with the sheriff a demand in writing for a written and verified statement of the amounts of rents and profits thus received and expenses paid and incurred, the period for redemption is extended five days after such a sworn statement is given by the person receiving such rents and profits, or by his or her agent, to the person making the demand, or to the sheriff. It shall be the duty of the sheriff to serve a copy of such demand upon the person receiving such rents and profits, his or her agent or his or her attorney, if service can be made in the county where the property is situate. If such person shall, for a period of ten days after such demand has been given to the sheriff, fail or refuse to give such statement, the redemptioner or other person entitled to redeem who made the demand may bring an action within sixty days after making such demand, but not later, in any court of competent jurisdiction, to compel an accounting and disclosure of such rents, profits and expenses, and until fifteen days from and after the final determination of such action the right of redemption is extended to such redemptioner or other person entitled to redeem who made the demand. If a sworn statement is given by the purchaser or other person receiving such rents and profits, and the redemptioner or other person entitled to redeem who made the demand, desires to contest the correctness of the statement, he or she must first redeem in accordance with such sworn statement, and if he or she desires to bring an action for an accounting thereafter he or she may do so within thirty days after such redemption, but not later.
(3) If such property is farming or agricultural property and is in possession of any purchaser or any previous redemptioner and is redeemed after the first day of April and before the first day of December, and the purchaser or previous redemptioner or the tenant of either has performed any work in preparing such property for crops or has planted crops, such purchaser or previous redemptioner shall have the option to demand reimbursement for such work and labor or to retain possession of such property until the first day of December following, and the new redemptioner shall be entitled to collect the reasonable rental value thereof during such farming year, unless such reasonable rental shall have been collected by such purchaser or previous redemptioner and accounted for to the new redemptioner.
[ 1987 c 442 s 709; 1899 c 53 s 13; RRS s 600. Formerly RCW 6.24.190.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2022 · leading case: Millay v. Cam, 135 Wash. 2d 193 (Wash. 1998).
Millay v. Cam, 135 Wash. 2d 193 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 3× “As the Court of Appeals noted, RCW 6.23.090(2) requires the redemptioner in possession to provide a verified statement of the amounts of rents and profits upon request.”
Millay v. Cam, 955 P.2d 791 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 3× “As the Court of Appeals noted, RCW 6.23.090(2) requires the redemptioner in possession to provide a verified statement of the amounts of rents and profits upon request.”
Millay v. Cam, 928 P.2d 463 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “It has not established a procedure for resolving disputes about the "sum required” as it has with regard to disputes about rents and profits in RCW 6.23.090(2). 7 This omission indicates that the Legislature did not intend to provide any preredemption procedure for disputing the…”
Doug Kruger, Resp. v. Michael Moi, App. (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 7× “Moi contends that the redemption period should have been extended by 60 days because Kruger failed to provide a verified statement of profits and expenses as required by RCW 6.23.090(2). He also contends the trial court erred by denying his motion to reconsider when, following…”
Joyous Investments, Llc, V. Jayakrishnan Nair (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “RCW 6.23.090(1) allows a purchaser to obtain insurance for the property, and the clerk’s minutes for the hearing suggest that the trial court found Joyous had to pay to insure the property.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 6.23.090(1) — 1 case
Joyous Investments, Llc, V. Jayakrishnan Nair (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “RCW 6.23.090(1) allows a purchaser to obtain insurance for the property, and the clerk’s minutes for the hearing suggest that the trial court found Joyous had to pay to insure the property.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 6.23.090(2) — 4 cases
Millay v. Cam, 135 Wash. 2d 193 (Wash. 1998). “As the Court of Appeals noted, RCW 6.23.090(2) requires the redemptioner in possession to provide a verified statement of the amounts of rents and profits upon request.”
Millay v. Cam, 955 P.2d 791 (Wash. 1998). “As the Court of Appeals noted, RCW 6.23.090(2) requires the redemptioner in possession to provide a verified statement of the amounts of rents and profits upon request.”
Millay v. Cam, 928 P.2d 463 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “It has not established a procedure for resolving disputes about the "sum required” as it has with regard to disputes about rents and profits in RCW 6.23.090(2). 7 This omission indicates that the Legislature did not intend to provide any preredemption procedure for disputing the…”
Doug Kruger, Resp. v. Michael Moi, App. (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “Moi contends that the redemption period should have been extended by 60 days because Kruger failed to provide a verified statement of profits and expenses as required by RCW 6.23.090(2). He also contends the trial court erred by denying his motion to reconsider when, following…”
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.