by the landlord. See Allen, 6 Wn. App. 2d at 370.
Gosney, Simoni, and Stickley were living in Oaks Mobile, paying rent, and were given the
rules and regulations by TST; thus, a rental agreement existed with TST. See id. Because there was
no written agreement, an implied rental agreement existed for a period of one year. See Gillette,
68 Wn. App. at 842. The record shows that TST began collecting rent from Gosney, Simoni, and
Stickley in August 2016, thus the one-year implied rental agreement began at that time.6
6
The ALJ concluded that “a new implied rental agreement term began on or around June 1, 2016,
when TST, LLC, took possession of the Oaks Mobile and RV Court.” AR at 558. While the
implied rental agreement began on August 1, 2016, we do not reverse the decision on this basis
because regardless of whether the implied rental agreement began on June 1 or August 1, TST
increased the rent on a date other than the date of expiration. Therefore, the ALJ did not err in
concluding that TST violated former RCW 59.20.090(2).
11
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 53352-9-II
Because there is no written rental agreement and there were no provisions about rent
increases in the rules and regulations, TST’s rent increase is governed by former RCW
59.20.090(2). Thus, TST could only increase the rent upon expiration of the rental term, which
was August 1, 2017. Therefore, TST’s attempt to increase the rent effective December 1, 2016 and
December 1, 2017 are invalid. Accordingly, the ALJ properly granted the Program’s motion for
summary judgment.7
ATTORNEY FEES ON APPEAL
TST requests attorney fees on appeal under RCW 4.84.350(1).
RCW 4.84.350(1) states: