Wash. Rev. Code § 65.08.070

Section 65.08.070 makes an unrecorded conveyance void against a subsequent purchaser in good faith from the same vendor.

Biles-Coleman Lumber Co. v. Lesamiz · filed 1956-10-18

The statute provides that the failure of a vendee to record an existing deed makes such a deed void as to a subsequent purchaser in good faith from the same vendor.

Section 65.08.070 describes the effect of an unrecorded deed valid on its face; it does not govern a recorded deed invalid on its face.

Walker v. TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE · filed 1992-04-27

In making this ruling, we also distinguish RCW 65.08.070. On appeal for the first time, Transamerica argues that that statute governs the effect of Walker’s second of trust. By its terms, however, the statute describes the effect of an unrecorded deed that is valid on its face. It does not describe the effect of a recorded deed that is invalid on its face.

An unrecorded deed is void against a subsequent good-faith purchaser whose conveyance is first recorded when the prior buyer fails to prove the purchaser had actual or constructive notice.

Paganelli v. Swendsen · filed 1957-05-16

We conclude that plaintiffs did not sustain their burden of proving that Hostetler had notice, actual or constructive, of their ownership of the property. We are satisfied that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that defendant Hostetler was a good-faith purchaser; and, by virtue of RCW 65.08.070, the plaintiffs’ deed is void as against him.

Section 65.08.070 protects a good faith purchaser for value from an earlier unrecorded interest, including when the purchaser buys property in a different chain of title.

Hendricks v. Lake · filed 1974-11-01

It seems evident that if a good faith purchaser for valuable consideration who records first is protected against a previous conveyance of the same interest from the same conveyor, that a good faith purchaser for valuable consideration who purchases property in a different title chain should likewise be protected.

Section 65.08.070 gives a later good faith purchaser for value priority over an earlier unrecorded mortgage when the purchaser lacks notice of it and records first.

In Re Smith · filed 1998-12-15

And, if the Bank fails in this burden, as the trial court found, then RCW 65.08.070 operates to preclude the Bank's claim of priority against the Shurtleffs.

An unrecorded conveyance of a water easement is void against a subsequent good faith purchaser for value whose conveyance is first duly recorded.

Perrin v. Derbyshire Scenic Acres Water Corp. · filed 1964-01-30

But assuming that the evidence was sufficient to support the court’s finding that there was a promise to supply water for a second residence and that such promise constituted a conveyance from the Derbyshires to the plaintiffs, it was nevertheless void as against the corporation, under RCW 65.08.070, which provides that every conveyance not recorded in the office of the recording officer of the county where the property is situated, is void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee in good faith and for a valuable consideration from the same vendor whose conveyance is first duly recorded.

Section 65.08.070 gives a deed recorded first priority over an unrecorded conveyance unless there is actual knowledge of the unrecorded transfer.

Altabet v. Monroe Methodist Church · filed 1989-07-10

The purpose of the statute is to make a deed recorded first superior to any unrecorded conveyance of the property unless there is actual knowledge of an unrecorded transfer, ...; a subsequent purchaser, without notice of the existing equities, is not required to search outside the record to inquire about them.

Section 65.08.070 lets a bona fide purchaser of real property prevail over an unrecorded conveyance.

National Bank of Alaska, N.A. v. Seaway Express Corp. (In Re Seaway Express Corp.) · filed 1989-09-27

Because Washington state law permits such a purchaser to prevail over those who take by an unrecorded conveyance, the interest of National Bank in the Auburn Property, if any, was avoidable as a matter of law.

Section 65.08.070 gives a later good faith real estate contract purchaser priority over an earlier unrecorded interest when the later purchaser buys without notice and records first.

Tomlinson v. Clarke · filed 1992-02-27

In the present case, the unchallenged findings of fact state that the Whitsells did not record their contract until after the Clarkes had purchased the land. Further, the trial court found the Clarkes were unaware of the Whitsells' claims to and interest in the lakefront property. The Clarkes, therefore, had no actual or constructive notice of the Whitsells' claim at the time they executed the real estate contract. There is no question that the Clarkes are bona fide purchasers and, as between them and the Whit-sells, they have a superior interest in the lakefront property in dispute.

Section 65.08.070 makes an unrecorded conveyance void against a later good faith purchaser for value who records first and lacks actual or constructive notice of the earlier interest.

Levien v. Fiala · filed 1995-09-11

Parties who delay recording their deeds to property until after another has recorded a deed to the same property have the burden of proving actual or constructive notice of their interest in property by the other, and if they fail to do so, their prior conveyance is void as against that party by virtue of RCW 65.08.070. ... The recording statute therefore applies to bar the Fialas’ unrecorded claim to the disputed triangular strip.

Section 65.08.070 makes a prior unrecorded deed void against the deed of a bona fide purchaser for value who records first.

Scott v. Woolard · filed 1974-11-20

We find there is substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determination that Scott was a bona fide purchaser for value. Accordingly, Woolard’s unrecorded deed, although prior in date, was void as against Scott’s deed which was first in recordation. RCW 65.08.070.

Section 65.08.070 protects a good faith purchaser for value whose conveyance is recorded before a competing unrecorded conveyance.

Brown v. Frederick · filed 1967-12-08

Although plaintiff Brown makes the cogent argument of “mutual mistake,” especially between him and Bailey, we find the record sufficient to support the findings of the trier of the facts that defendant Frederick (a) had no notice, actual or constructive, of any claim by plaintiff Brown to the 100 foot strip and (b) was a bona fide purchaser for value, without notice of any adverse claim thereto, and is entitled to the benefit of RCW 65.08.070, which provides: ... Every such conveyance not so recorded is void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee in good faith and for a valuable consideration from the same vendor, his heirs or devisees, of the same real property or any portion thereof whose conveyance is first duly recorded.

Section 65.08.070 gives a duly recorded later interest priority over an earlier conveyance that was not recorded in the county where the land sits, if the later holder paid consideration and lacked notice.

Emerald v. Harrison · filed 2006-04-12

Washington law provides that any conveyance of an interest in land that is not recorded in the county in which the land sits is void as against any subsequent interest that is duly recorded, provided the holder of the subsequent interest paid consideration and had no notice of the prior interest. See RCW 65.08.070.

Section 65.08.070 gives priority to a later recorded interest acquired for value without notice over an earlier conveyance that was not recorded in the county where the land lies.

In Re Emerald Outdoor Advertising, Llc, Debtor, Tiffany Harrison, Creditor Gold Eagle Gaming Llc, Creditor v. Emerald Ou · filed 2006-04-13

Washington law provides that any conveyance of an interest in land that is not recorded in the county in which the land sits is void as against any subsequent interest that is duly recorded, provided the holder of the subsequent interest paid consideration and had no notice of the prior interest.

An unwritten, unrecorded understanding to grant a deed of trust interest is void against a lender with a recorded interest.

Phillip Kairez, et ux v. Budget Funding I, LLC · filed 2013-11-07

The unwritten, unrecorded understanding that NRK would grant the Kairezes a deed of trust interest in the apartment complex is void against Budget under the recording statute.

Section 65.08.070 gives a first-recorded interest priority over an earlier unrecorded conveyance when the later purchaser or mortgagee lacked actual knowledge of it.

BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Fulbright · filed 2014-06-26

Now codified under RCW 65.08.070, the recording act provides that the deed or interest first recorded is superior to any outstanding unrecorded conveyance of the same property unless the later mortgagee or purchaser had actual knowledge of the prior unrecorded interest.

Section 65.08.070 gives priority to a mortgagee that pays value, records first, and lacks notice of a prior unrecorded interest.

OneWest Bank FSB v. Erickson · filed 2016-02-04

In order to qualify as a bona fide purchaser or mortgagee under Washington law, a party must pay value for an interest in land, record its interest first, and act in good faith without notice of a prior party's unrecorded interest.

Section 65.08.070 protects a good faith purchaser who pays valuable consideration and records their interest from an earlier unrecorded easement if the purchaser had no notice of it.

Gervais v. Brad L. Miederhoff And Wells Fargo Bank, Na · filed 2017-02-14

Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err in concluding that Miederhoff had no inquiry notice of the unrecorded easement. Therefore, Miederhoff was a bona fide purchaser who took lot 3 free of the unrecorded easement.

Section 65.08.070 gives priority to a first recorded deed of trust when its holder took in good faith without notice of a competing interest.

Veristone Fund I, Llc v. Kerrigan · filed 2020-05-05

Because Kerrigan recorded her deed of trust first, her interest was superior to Veristone’s.

Section 65.08.070 permits an option to purchase real property to be recorded as a conveyance, giving constructive notice of the option.

Strong v. Clark · filed 1960-05-12

The recording statute, RCW 65.08.070, provides in part as follows: ... The option to purchase constituted an “interest in real property” and also “affected” the title to the property. ... The recording gave constructive notice to all persons that the owners had given the tenants an option to purchase the property for the consideration specified therein.

Section 65.08.070 allows an interest in a fixture to be recorded as a real property interest; an unrecorded fixture lease does not give a later purchaser constructive notice.

Courtright Cattle Co. v. Dolsen Co. · filed 1980-10-30

... nor constructive notice of the fixture lease because of Dolsen's failure to record its interests in the clarifier under RCW 65.08.070, the real property recording statute.

Section 65.08.070 does not govern the recording of county road documentation; filing under the county engineer statute provides constructive notice.

Ellingsen v. Franklin County · filed 1989-09-29

The general recording statute, RCW 65.08, has never spoken to the recording of documentation of county roads. The more specific statute, RCW 36.80.040, deals with recording of these matters and was enacted 20 years prior to the present general recording statute.

Section 65.08.070 does not apply to personal property.

Paris American Corp. v. McCausland · filed 1988-09-06

This contention is without merit because the cited statute does not apply to personal property.

Section 65.08.070 protects a good faith purchaser who first records an executory real estate contract against an earlier unrecorded interest, including when the contracts predate the 1984 amendments.

Tomlinson v. Clarke · filed 1991-01-22

A retroactive application of the 1984 amendments in effect confirms that a pre-1984 executory contract is a conveyance that qualifies for full protection under the recording act.

Section 65.08.070 does not require a promissory note to be recorded before its holder can enforce it.

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, V Avalo · filed 2016-11-14

They rely on RCW 65.08.070 for the proposition that holder status must be proved with evidence of a legitimate delivery. But the Avalos misunderstand the significance of this law. ... This statute does not require that a note be recorded before the holder of that note can enforce it.

An agreement about assessment payments and satisfaction of a condominium association’s priority lien was not shown to be a conveyance under RCW 65.08.070.

Diaz v. Hsueh · filed 2019-04-22

Diaz provides no authority that supports the position that the parties’ agreement with regard to the payment of assessments and satisfaction of the “super priority” portion of the Association’s lien was a “conveyance” within the meaning of RCW 65.08.070.

Section 65.08.070(1) does not require recording a lender’s prepayment of condominium assessments because the payment is not a conveyance.

Jose Diaz, Appellant/cr-respondent v. North Star Trustee, Llc., Respondent/cr-appellants · filed 2021-02-16

By prepaying assessments the owner would otherwise be responsible for, Bank of America merely reduced the total monetary value of the Association’s lien and retained its priority status. Thus, the payment was not a “conveyance” within the meaning of RCW 65.08.060(3) and it was not required to be recorded.

A recorded mortgage gives subsequent purchasers notice only within the property's chain of title; a mortgage describing a different existing tract does not give notice of an encumbrance on the intended tract.

Koch v. Swanson · filed 1971-03-10

Subsequent purchasers and encumbrancers take the property with notice of the prior mortgage. RCW 65.08.070. ... Where existing property is described, the index and the recorded document imparts notice only as to matters within its chain of title.

Section 65.08.070 makes a recorded conveyance notice to subsequent purchasers of the interest it creates, including a recorded revocation of a power of attorney.

Lazov v. Black · filed 1977-08-11

The recording of a "conveyance" is notice to subsequent purchasers of the interest which it creates.

Section 65.08.070 requires recording in the county where the property is situated to give a purchaser constructive notice of a lien.

Kshensky v. Pioneer National Title Insurance · filed 1979-03-12

The decree creating the lien was never "recorded in the office of the recording officer of the county where the property is situated" as required by statute in order to give rise to a claim of constructive notice to the purchaser. RCW 65.08-.070. The purchaser was therefore a bona fide purchaser for value at the time he took title and he took title of the property free of any claim of lien.

Recording a deed gives the grantor's successor legal notice of its terms.

Carr v. Burlington Northern, Inc. · filed 1979-05-21

The deed was recorded. Thus in law the grantor's successor was as much on notice of the terms of the deed as was the grantee's successor.

Recording an easement with the county auditor gives constructive notice of it to later purchasers of the property.

Wilhelm v. Beyersdorf · filed 2000-05-18

Recording the easement with the county auditor gives constructive notice to any successors in title. Ellingsen v. Franklin County, 117 Wash.2d 24, 30, 810 P.2d 910 (1991) (citing RCW 65.08.070); Kirk, 66 Wash.App. at 239-40, 831 P.2d 792.

A recorded deed of trust gives a later purchaser constructive notice of the secured interest, preventing the purchaser from acquiring a superior interest.

Associates Housing Finance v. Stredwick · filed 2004-02-03

Because the abstract of title would have shown Ms. Stredwick that Associates had a perfected security interest on a deed of trust to Lot 3 prior to the Van Hollebekes' judgment lien on the same property, Ms. Stredwick had constructive notice of Associates' paramount interest. RCW 65.08.070; RCW 48.29.010. With such notice, she did not acquire superior interest in the property.

Section 65.08.070 protects a bona fide purchaser from a prior unrecorded interest when the purchaser cannot be charged with notice held by a title insurer through an agency relationship.

Soper v. Knaflich · filed 1980-07-07

Next, the Sopers contend that the trial court erred in deciding that the O'Neils were bona fide purchasers for value who took the property free from the prior unrecorded interest of the Sopers. RCW 65.08.070; ... Because there are no facts to prove the requisites of consent and control between Chicago Title and University Federal, there is no issue of fact as to any agency relationship. ... Entry of the partial summary judgment dismissing the O'Neils was correct. That judgment is affirmed.

A buyer under an executory land contract cannot qualify as a bona fide purchaser until paying the full contract price and acquiring legal title.

Reed v. Eller · filed 1983-01-31

The Porrecas are vendees on an executory contract. They cannot become bona fide purchasers until they have acquired legal title by paying the full contract price.

Section 65.08.070 makes unrecorded conveyances of real property interests void against bona fide purchasers for value; a personal injury plaintiff who is not such a purchaser receives no protection under that rule.

Iwai v. State · filed 1994-12-06

While RCW 65.08.070 provides that conveyances of real property interests are void against bona fide purchasers for value if not recorded, Mrs. Iwai is not a bona fide purchaser.

Visible possession by a tenant requires a purchaser or mortgagee to inquire into the tenancy; without that inquiry, the purchaser or mortgagee cannot claim good faith protection against an unrecorded lease.

Peoples National Bank v. Birney's Enterprises, Inc. · filed 1989-07-05

In this case, there simply are no special circumstances chargeable to Birney's that excused the Bank from the inquiry required because of Birney's visible possession.

Section 65.08.070 generally protects a bona fide purchaser against an earlier unrecorded interest, but inquiry notice of that interest defeats the protection.

In Re Professional Investment Properties of America · filed 1992-01-30

Washington, which is a race-notice state, generally holds that a bona fide purchaser prevails over a prior transferee who has failed to record. RCW 65.08.070; Paganelli v. Swendsen, 50 Wash.2d 304, 308, 311 P.2d 676, 678 (1957). ... The involuntary petition indicated the very people who instigated the bankruptcy proceedings held a deed of trust. This petition should have raised the trustee's suspicions and compelled him to inquire further.

Section 65.08.070 generally gives a bona fide purchaser priority over an unrecorded real property interest, but inquiry notice prevents the purchaser from claiming that priority.

Briggs v. Kent (In re Professional Investment Properties of America) · filed 1992-01-30

Washington, which is a race-notice state, generally holds that a bona fide purchaser prevails over a prior transferee who has failed to record. RCW 65.08.070; Paganelli v. Swendsen, 50 Wash.2d 304, 308, 311 P.2d 676, 678 (1957). ... The petition, itself, provided adequate inquiry notice.

Section 65.08.070 bars a mortgagee’s priority claim against purchasers for value who lack actual or constructive notice of its mortgage.

Bank of Pullman v. Shurtleff · filed 1998-12-15

And, if the Bank fails in this burden, as the trial court found, then RCW 65.08.070 operates to preclude the Bank’s claim of priority against the Shurtleffs.

Section 65.08.070’s recording priority weighs against equitable subrogation when a title insurer has actual knowledge of an intervening judgment lien.

Kim v. Lee · filed 2001-09-20

However, allowing subrogation in the face of actual knowledge would discount the purpose of the recording statute, RCW 65.08.070. The purpose of the recording statute is to make the deed first recorded superior to any outstanding unrecorded conveyance of the same property unless the mortgagee or purchaser had actual knowledge of the transfer not filed of record.

An unrecorded conveyance is invalid against a subsequent good faith purchaser whose conveyance is recorded first.

Selene RMOF II Reo Acquisitions II, LLC v. Ward · filed 2017-08-03

But Ward ignores that her quitclaim deed is umecorded and thus invalid against subsequent good faith purchasers under the ... facts here.

Section 65.08.070 gives a purchaser constructive notice of recorded restrictions within the property's chain of title; the purchaser need not search records outside that chain.

Dickson v. Kates · filed 2006-05-02

Furthermore, our recording statutes are intended to provide constructive notice to land possessors who have restrictions burdening their land. See RCW 65.08.070 (race-notice recording act). ... Thus, one searching the index has a right to rely upon the index and recorded documents and is not bound to search the record outside the chain of title of the property presently being conveyed. Koch, 4 Wash.App. at 459, 481 P.2d 915. ... Thus, we hold that the Dicksons did not have constructive notice of the covenant burdening their land.

An unrecorded right of occupancy remains enforceable against a later mortgagee who has notice of the occupancy but fails to make reasonable inquiry into the occupant’s rights.

Clare House Bungalow Homes Residents Ass'n v. Clare House Bungalow Homes, L.L.C. (In Re Clare House Bungalow Homes, L.L. · filed 2011-03-11

Each lienholder had a duty to make reasonable and prudent inquiry as to the terms of that occupancy if the lienholder desired to obtain rights greater than the occupants. By failing to make any inquiry, each of the defendant lienholders are subject to the terms of the Resident Agreement to the extent the Resident Agreement grants rights in the real property.

Section 65.08.070 applies to a deed of consolidation affecting title, and its recording gives a later purchaser constructive notice of the deed.

Shepard v. Holmes · filed 2014-12-23

Like the option to purchase in Strong, the deed of consolidation in this case was subject to the recording statute, RCW 65.08.070. ... When she purchased the property in July 2007, Ms. Shepard was therefore on constructive notice of the existence of the consolidation deed.

Section 65.08.070 prevents an unrecorded interest in real property from binding a subsequent purchaser in good faith.

National Bank of Alaska, N.A. v. Erickson (In re Seaway Express Corp.) · filed 1990-08-30

An unrecorded interest in property is not binding on a subsequent purchaser in good faith.

Section 65.08.070 protects a foreclosing mortgagee who purchases at the foreclosure sale against unknown, unrecorded subordinate interests.

Valentine v. Portland Timber & Land Holding Co. · filed 1976-03-22

Public policy reasons dictate that the recording statute should protect the foreclosing mortgagee as well as the purchaser at a foreclosure sale against unrecorded and unknown interests.

Section 65.08.070 protects good faith purchasers and mortgagees for value against unrecorded conveyances, but does not protect judgment creditors.

Aberdeen Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Empire Manufactured Homes, Inc. · filed 1983-11-17

RCW 65.08.070 protects purchasers and mortgagees in good faith and for valuable consideration against unrecorded conveyances. A judgment creditor, however, is not a purchaser within the meaning of the recording act.

Section 65.08.070 does not require a money judgment lien to be recorded with the county auditor to be effective against a subsequent purchaser because the lien is not a conveyance.

Federal Intermediate Credit Bank of Spokane v. O/S SABLEFISH · filed 1989-01-12

Moreover, the recording act states that while a conveyance of real property is effective between the immediate parties without being recorded, it must be recorded to be effective against subsequent bona fide purchasers. ... Thus, we do not perceive that a judgment lien can reasonably be considered to be a conveyance of real property, which commonly denotes a transfer of an estate or title.

Section 65.08.070 protects a subsequent good faith purchaser for value who records first; a person claiming that protection must initially prove payment of valuable consideration.

Parker v. Speedy Re-Finance, Ltd. · filed 1979-04-16

However, logic and justice dictate that the grantee, alleging a bona fide purchaser status, has the initial burden of proving payment of a valuable consideration.

An unrecorded assignment of a deed of trust is void against a subsequent purchaser or mortgagee in good faith.

Sternberg v. Debuys · filed 1992-06-15

Margolese's assignment of the deed of trust to Sternberg was void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee in good faith because Sternberg did not record. Wash.Rev.Code § 65.08.070 (all conveyances must be recorded); see also Wash.Rev.Code §§ 65.04.010 (assignments are valid), 65.08.060 (assignment is a conveyance).

Section 65.08.070 requires recording an assignment of a vendor's real estate contract to gain priority over later creditors and purchasers when the assignment also conveys legal title.

Freeborn v. Seattle Trust & Savings Bank · filed 1980-09-25

We further hold that where the vendor in a real estate contract executes a "Deed and Seller's Assignment of Real Estate Contract" by which he or she (a) assigns the contract and (b) conveys the real estate (legal title), as in In re Freeborn, the assignee-grantee must both file pursuant to U.C.C. article 9 (RCW 62A.9-101 et seq.) and record pursuant to RCW 65.08.070 in order to have priority over subsequent lien creditors, purchasers and encumbrancers.

Section 65.08.070 provides that recording a conveyance of real property perfects the security interest.

Steinberg v. Crossland Mortgage Corp. ( in Re Park at Dash Point L.P.) · filed 1991-06-28

The second clause provides that such security interests will be governed by the recording statute, Wash.Rev. Code 65.08.070, which specifies that a recorded conveyance of real property perfects the security interest.

Section 65.08.070 requires recorded instruments to be acknowledged but does not specify their contents.

Wilson Sporting Goods Co. v. Pedersen · filed 1994-12-05

Beneficial asserts that the rule of idem sonans does not apply to instruments affecting real property because the recording statutes govern. However, the recording statutes Beneficial refers to do not specify what must he contained in an instrument recorded. The only specific requirement is that they be acknowledged. RCW 65.08.070.

Section 65.08.070 does not make a forged note valid or create a payment obligation through recording.

Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Ticor Title Insurance · filed 1997-09-22

The recording statute cannot make valid the invalid note Home Federal/Fidelity received. Stated another way, the mere recording of an instrument cannot create legal obligations to pay where none existed before.

Recording a boundary line adjustment gives notice of it but does not make an otherwise invalid adjustment effective.

Chelan County v. Nykreim · filed 2001-03-22

The notices of title here merely provide notice of the BLA. Recording the BLA does not establish its effectiveness.

Section 65.08.070 makes recording an assignment a means of notifying later purchasers of an interest in the property; an unrecorded assignment is not invalid for that reason alone.

Corales v. Flagstar Bank, FSB · filed 2011-10-14

The purpose of recording the assignment is to put parties who subsequently purchase an interest in the property on notice of which entity owns a debt secured by the property. RCW 65.08.070. Therefore, Plaintiffs claim based on an alleged lack of recording of the assignment from MERS to Flagstar is unavailing, and the-court grants summary judgment to Flags-tar and MERS with regard to this issue.

Section 65.08.070 concerns priority over later claimants; failure to record an assignment does not prevent its enforcement when priority is not at issue.

Bank of New York v. Barbanti · filed 2013-12-12

But this case does not involve the priority of the deed and seller's assignment. Failing to perfect does not impact the validity or enforceability of the deed and seller's assignment of the real estate contract.

Section 65.08.070 permits, but does not require, recording a deed or other conveyance document with the county auditor.

Christopher E. Larson, Et Ano., V. Snohomish County · filed 2021-12-06

Recording a deed or other conveyance document with a county auditor is not required by law, but is, instead, permissive.

For an agent’s gift of real property, the court treated § 65.08.070(2) as requiring recording to complete the conveyance.

Margaret Garrison, V. Mcgill · filed 2022-01-19(2)

A conveyance of property is invalid unless it is recorded. RCW 65.08.070(2).

Section 65.08.070(1) permits recording a real property conveyance to protect the purchaser’s interest against subsequent purchasers, but does not require owners to record it.

Building Industry Association Of Wa, V. State Of Washington · filed 2024-02-27(1)

And while RCW 65.08.070’s title is “Real property conveyances to be recorded,” it does not require property owners to record real property conveyances. Rather, the statute merely provides that real property conveyances “may be recorded” to protect the purchaser’s interest against subsequent purchasers. RCW 65.08.070(1).

Recording an assignment of rents under § 65.08.070 perfects the security interest against subsequent purchasers or mortgagees, even before enforcement.

In Re Park at Dash Point L.P. · filed 1990-11-28

Regardless of the timing of enforcement, the recording of the assignment of rents perfects it, or ensures that it will be valid as against any subsequent “purchaser or mortgagee” of the same real property. RCW 7.28.230(2), 65.08.070.

Section 65.08.070 generally gives priority to the first recorded mortgage, but equitable subrogation can preserve a paid-off senior mortgage’s priority for a refinancing lender despite its knowledge of intervening liens.

Bank of America, NA v. Prestance Corp. · filed 2007-06-07

Our recording act says B has a higher priority because it recorded first, putting the world on notice as to its interest in A's land. RCW 65.08.070. If D fully discharges B's debt, then equitable subrogation substitutes D for B, so D has a higher priority than C, even though D recorded after. ... We adopt § 7.6 of the Restatement (Third) and hold WFB West is equitably subrogated to Washington Mutual's first-priority lien, regardless of either its actual or constructive knowledge of intervening interests.