Wash. Rev. Code » Title 64 · Chapter 64.34
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445 (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) A declarant and any dealer warrants that a unit will be in at least as good condition at the earlier of the time of the conveyance or delivery of possession as it was at the time of contracting, reasonable wear and tear and damage by casualty or condemnation excepted.
(2) A declarant and any dealer impliedly warrants that a unit and the common elements in the condominium are suitable for the ordinary uses of real estate of its type and that any improvements made or contracted for by such declarant or dealer will be:
(a) Free from defective materials;
(b) Constructed in accordance with sound engineering and construction standards;
(c) Constructed in a workmanlike manner; and
(d) Constructed in compliance with all laws then applicable to such improvements.
(3) A declarant and any dealer warrants to a purchaser of a unit that may be used for residential use that an existing use, continuation of which is contemplated by the parties, does not violate applicable law at the earlier of the time of conveyance or delivery of possession.
(4) Warranties imposed by this section may be excluded or modified as specified in RCW 64.34.450.
(5) For purposes of this section, improvements made or contracted for by an affiliate of a declarant, as defined in RCW 64.34.020(1), are made or contracted for by the declarant.
(6) Any conveyance of a unit transfers to the purchaser all of the declarant's implied warranties of quality.
(7) In a judicial proceeding for breach of any of the obligations arising under this section, the plaintiff must show that the alleged breach has adversely affected or will adversely affect the performance of that portion of the unit or common elements alleged to be in breach. As used in this subsection, an "adverse effect" must be more than technical and must be significant to a reasonable person. To establish an adverse effect, the person alleging the breach is not required to prove that the breach renders the unit or common element uninhabitable or unfit for its intended purpose.
(8) Proof of breach of any obligation arising under this section is not proof of damages. Damages awarded for a breach of an obligation arising under this section are the cost of repairs. However, if it is established that the cost of such repairs is clearly disproportionate to the loss in market value caused by the breach, then damages shall be limited to the loss in market value.
[ 2004 c 201 s 5; 1992 c 220 s 26; 1989 c 43 s 4-112.]

Notes:

Application—2004 c 201 ss 5 and 6: "Sections 5 and 6 of this act apply only to condominiums created by declarations recorded on or after July 1, 2004." [ 2004 c 201 s 12.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, LLC, 71 P.3d 692 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, LLC, 71 P.3d 692 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 7× “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLC, 225 P.3d 213 (Wash. 2009). · cites it 3× “I agree with the Court of Appeals opinion in Satomi below: there are four reasons why the FAA does not apply to the statutory warranties under RCW 64.34.445. First, this is “a ‘garden variety1 Washington real estate deal.”
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, L.L.C., 117 Wash. App. 369 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Marina Cove Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “A “declaration” is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). Defined as, “[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two emits.”
One Pac. Towers Homeowners'ass'n v. Hal Real Est. Investments, Inc., 61 P.3d 1094 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 2× “443, RCW 64.34.445. The Act does not specify how one "succeeds to" special declarant rights.”
Atherton Condo Apt.-owners Ass'n Bd of Directors v. Blume Dev. Co., 799 P.2d 250 (Wash. 1990). “310, and the applicable statute of limitation, RCW 4.16.080, against Owners by Blume and Lynnwood.”
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLC, 139 Wash. App. 175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “443, 38 which requires condominium declarants to provide specific implied warranties, and RCW 64.34.445, 39 which permits declarants to make express warranties.”
Marina Condo. Homeowner's Ass'n v. Stratford at the Marina, LLC, 254 P.3d 827 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 8× “The HOA asserted numerous common law and statutory claims in its original complaint, though the only claim relevant to this appeal is the claim for breach of implied warranty under RCW 64.34.445(2). 1 ¶3 In May 2008, Stratford moved to compel arbitration, which the court granted.”
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. SATOMI, LLC, 159 P.3d 460 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 5× “443, [38] which requires condominium declarants to provide specific implied warranties, and RCW 64.34.445, [39] *467 which permits declarants to make express warranties.”
Marina Condo. Homeowners Ass'n v. Stratford, 254 P.3d 827 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 9× “The HOA asserted numerous common law and statutory claims in its original complaint, though the only claim relevant to this appeal is the claim for breach of implied warranty under RCW 64.34.445(2). [1] ¶ 3 In May 2008, Stratford moved to compel arbitration, which the court…”
Canal Station North Condo. Ass'n v. Ballard Leary Phase II, LP, 322 P.3d 1229 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “For instance, both declarants and dealers 6 can be liable for breach of implied warranties of quality under RCW 64.34.445. Likewise, board members owe fiduciary duties to unit owners under RCW 64.”
Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “A "Declaration" is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). [18] Defined as, "[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two units.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445(2) — 6 cases
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, LLC, 71 P.3d 692 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLC, 225 P.3d 213 (Wash. 2009). “I agree with the Court of Appeals opinion in Satomi below: there are four reasons why the FAA does not apply to the statutory warranties under RCW 64.34.445. First, this is “a ‘garden variety1 Washington real estate deal.”
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, L.L.C., 117 Wash. App. 369 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Marina Condo. Homeowner's Ass'n v. Stratford at the Marina, LLC, 254 P.3d 827 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “The HOA asserted numerous common law and statutory claims in its original complaint, though the only claim relevant to this appeal is the claim for breach of implied warranty under RCW 64.34.445(2). 1 ¶3 In May 2008, Stratford moved to compel arbitration, which the court granted.”
Marina Condo. Homeowners Ass'n v. Stratford, 254 P.3d 827 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “The HOA asserted numerous common law and statutory claims in its original complaint, though the only claim relevant to this appeal is the claim for breach of implied warranty under RCW 64.34.445(2). [1] ¶ 3 In May 2008, Stratford moved to compel arbitration, which the court…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445(2)(b) — 4 cases
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, LLC, 71 P.3d 692 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Park Avenue Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Buchan Developments, L.L.C., 117 Wash. App. 369 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “Both the Buchan and Marina Cove warranties also used the same language to accomplish modification of the implied warranties: [I]n the event of any variance between the provisions of this Limited Warranty and the implied warranty provided under RCW 64.34.445 it is agreed that the…”
Marina Cove Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “A “declaration” is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). Defined as, “[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two emits.”
Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “A "Declaration" is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). [18] Defined as, "[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two units.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445(3) — 1 case
Filmore, Lllp, Res. v. Unit Owners Ass'n Of Centre Pointe Condo. (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445(4) — 2 cases
Marina Cove Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “A “declaration” is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). Defined as, “[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two emits.”
Ass'n v. Isabella Estates, 34 P.3d 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “A "Declaration" is a document that creates a condominium. RCW 64.34.020(15). [18] Defined as, "[a] person who owns or has a right to acquire either six or more units in a condominium or fifty percent or more of the units in a condominium containing more than two units.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.34.445(6) — 2 cases
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLC, 139 Wash. App. 175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “443, 38 which requires condominium declarants to provide specific implied warranties, and RCW 64.34.445, 39 which permits declarants to make express warranties.”
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. SATOMI, LLC, 159 P.3d 460 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “443, [38] which requires condominium declarants to provide specific implied warranties, and RCW 64.34.445, [39] *467 which permits declarants to make express warranties.”
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.