Washington Law Against Discrimination

Key Takeaways

• The Washington Law Against Discrimination is chapter 49.60 RCW, the state civil rights statute, and it governs employment, credit, insurance, and public accommodation as well as real estate.
• RCW 49.60.222 lists the unfair practices in a real estate transaction and protects more traits than the federal Fair Housing Act does.
• RCW 49.60.224 makes a discriminatory restriction in a recorded instrument void, and makes it a separate unfair practice to insert one or to honor one found in the chain of title.
• A real estate complaint goes to the Washington State Human Rights Commission within one year under RCW 49.60.230(2)(a), longer than the six-month window for most other complaints.

What It Means

The Washington Law Against Discrimination, codified as chapter 49.60 RCW, is the state's civil rights statute. Real estate is only one of the arenas it governs, since the same chapter also reaches employment, credit, insurance, and public accommodation. For a broker, the sections that matter run from RCW 49.60.222 through RCW 49.60.227. Together they define the unfair practices in a real estate transaction, void discriminatory provisions buried in recorded instruments, and set out who enforces the statute and what it costs to violate it.

The statute is routinely described as broader than the federal Fair Housing Act, and for real estate that description holds up. It names traits the federal act does not, widening the set of characteristics that count as a Protected Class in a Washington transaction. It also does something the federal act does not do at all. It declares old racially restrictive covenants void by operation of law and makes it an unfair practice to honor one that turns up in the chain of title. Washington does not merely disapprove of those covenants; it strips them of legal effect and gives owners a court process for clearing them off the record.

How It Works in Washington

RCW 49.60.222 catalogs the unfair practices in a real estate transaction, running from refusing to negotiate, through discriminatory advertising and discriminatory listing instructions, to discriminatory terms in financing and title insurance. RCW 49.60.224 turns to the records themselves. Every provision in a written instrument that purports to restrict conveyance, encumbrance, occupancy, or lease by a protected trait is void, and RCW 49.60.224(2) makes it a separate unfair practice to insert such a provision or to honor or attempt to honor one in the chain of title. RCW 49.60.227 then gives the owner, occupant, tenant, or homeowners' association board an in rem declaratory judgment action to have the void language struck from the public records.

Enforcement runs through the Washington State Human Rights Commission on the timeline in RCW 49.60.230(2)(a). Once an administrative law judge finds a violation, RCW 49.60.225 authorizes actual damages and injunctive relief plus a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for a first unfair practice in a real estate transaction, up to $25,000 for a second within five years, and up to $50,000 for a third within seven years.

Example

Marcus Lindell has a purchase and sale agreement on a 1948-plat home in Seattle at $780,000 with $20,000 earnest money down, closing in 30 days. The preliminary title report discloses a covenant recorded with the original plat restricting occupancy to people of a specified race. His buyer asks whether the sale can still close on time.

It can, and nothing about the covenant has to be cured first. RCW 49.60.224(1) makes that provision void, so it restricts nobody and leaves the buyer nothing to clear. What Marcus may not do is treat it as live language. Repeating a Racially Restrictive Covenant in marketing, or advising the buyer to comply with one, is itself an unfair practice under RCW 49.60.224(2) and can carry a civil penalty of up to $10,000 as a first offense under RCW 49.60.225(1)(a). After closing, the new owner may file the action in RCW 49.60.227 in superior court in King County and have the language struck from the recorded document.

Common Mistakes and Exam Traps

• A racially restrictive covenant in an old deed is void by statute. It is not merely unenforceable by custom, and it is not something the parties agree to overlook.
• The Law Against Discrimination is not a housing-only statute. Chapter 49.60 RCW also covers employment, credit, insurance, and public accommodation, so the same chapter can appear in a question that has nothing to do with a listing.
• The filing window for a real estate complaint is one year, not the six months that applies to most other Washington discrimination complaints.
• Voiding a covenant does not erase it from the public record by itself. An owner uses the declaratory judgment action in RCW 49.60.227 to have the language struck.