Tedford: If you say you’re happy then okay I have to believe that[.] I’ll expect your
partial deposit and your rent[.] And I will send you a receipt for your partial deposit
and your rent[.]
Mattler: I think you misunderstood me. I was not complaining about anything.
CP at 70.
Before April 18, 2018, Guy and Mattler issued two rent checks that were returned for non-
sufficient funds. Guy and Mattler also failed to pay the $1000 security deposit. On April 18,
Tedford served Guy and Mattler with both a 10-day notice to comply or vacate for failure to pay
the security deposit, and a 20-day notice to terminate the tenancy, effective May 31.
On June 1, Tedford served Guy and Mattler with a summons and complaint for unlawful
detainer based on the 20-day notice to terminate the tenancy for no cause. In response to the
complaint, Guy and Mattler filed a memorandum claiming they were current on their rent and thus,
were in compliance with the rental agreement, and that Tedford had filed the unlawful detainer
action against them in retaliation because they were “asserting their right to have smoke and carbon
monoxide detectors in the home.” CP at 19.
II. SHOW CAUSE HEARINGS
At the initial show cause hearing on June 15, the commissioner heard arguments from both
parties. There was substantial disagreement over the terms of the lease and whether the lease
duration was for a one year or a month-to-month tenancy. The parties also argued the retaliation
defense. The commissioner continued the show cause hearing to July 6, 2018, so that the parties
could present more complete evidence and testimony, and proceed to trial if necessary.
3
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 52222-5-II