RCW 18.86 divides a Washington licensee's duties into two tiers: duties owed to all parties (including parties the broker does not represent) and additional duties owed only to the broker's own client. This two-tier structure is heavily tested because it defines exactly what protection non-represented parties receive.
Regardless of whom the broker represents, Washington brokers owe every party in a transaction:
1. Good faith and honesty — cannot lie or engage in deceptive practices toward any party 2. Present all written offers and counteroffers promptly — cannot "sit on" an offer because it seems too low; the broker's personal opinion of the offer's merit is irrelevant 3. Disclose all material defects actually known to the broker — note the word "actually": brokers are not required to investigate and discover defects, only to disclose those they actually know about 4. Account for all money and property received — cannot misappropriate, mishandle, or fail to account for trust funds
A broker owes their own client the full fiduciary-level obligations:
This is a frequently tested point: the duty of confidentiality does not expire when the agency relationship ends. If a buyer's agent learns that the buyer would pay up to $500,000 (but offered $465,000), that information cannot be shared with a future seller — even if the original agency relationship concluded years ago. When the same broker later takes a listing for the same property, they carry that confidential obligation into the new representation.
Real-world example: A broker represented a seller who confided that she was moving to a care facility and "just needed the house to sell quickly" — she would take significantly below asking price. The sale closed. Two years later, the same broker runs into the buyer at a neighborhood event and shares "your seller was desperate — she would have taken anything." This is a confidentiality violation. The broker had no right to share the former client's confidential information after the transaction ended.
---
---
Quiz Questions:
Q1. A seller's agent knows the property's foundation has a crack that the seller did not disclose on Form 17. The broker discovered it during a walkthrough. What is the broker's obligation under RCW 18.86?
A) Disclose the crack only to the seller, who can then decide whether to amend Form 17 B) Disclose the crack to all parties, including buyers, because it is a material defect actually known to the broker C) Decline to show the property until the seller discloses the defect D) Note the defect in internal files but respect the seller's confidentiality about the foundation
Answer: B — Under RCW 18.86, brokers owe ALL parties the duty to disclose material defects they actually know about. This is one of the duties that applies even to parties the broker does not represent (the buyer). The broker must disclose to buyers even if the seller has not.
---
Q2. A buyer's agent receives an offer from their buyer client that the agent personally believes is far too low to be taken seriously. The seller's property is listed at $650,000 and the offer is $475,000. What must the buyer's agent do?
A) Advise the buyer to raise the offer before it is presented, to avoid embarrassing the buyer B) Present the offer to the seller's agent promptly — the duty to present all written offers applies regardless of the agent's opinion of the offer C) Consult with the seller's agent before submitting, to determine if the offer will even be considered D) Hold the offer for 48 hours to see if the buyer will reconsider
Answer: B — Under RCW 18.86, brokers must present all written offers and counteroffers promptly. The agent's personal view of the offer's likelihood of success is irrelevant. Low offers must be submitted promptly just like strong offers.
---
Q3. A buyer told her agent that she would pay up to $480,000 for a property, but her initial offer is $440,000. The transaction closed at $455,000. Three years later, the same agent lists the property when the buyer (now seller) decides to move. A new buyer makes an offer. Can the agent share the seller's previously stated maximum price of $480,000 with the new buyer?
A) Yes, because three years have passed and the original agency relationship has long ended B) No, because the confidentiality duty survives the end of the agency relationship with no time limit C) Yes, if the original buyer (now seller) does not object when asked D) No, but only for one year after the original transaction closed
Answer: B — Washington's confidentiality obligation under RCW 18.86 explicitly survives the end of the agency relationship. There is no expiration date. The original buyer shared this information in confidence with their agent; that confidence is permanently protected.
---
Q4. Which of the following is a duty a Washington seller's agent owes to an UNREPRESENTED BUYER?
A) Loyalty to the buyer's interests B) Active advice on what price to offer C) Disclosure of material defects actually known to the broker D) Confidentiality regarding the buyer's stated maximum price
Answer: C — Disclosure of actually known material defects is one of the four duties owed to all parties, including non-clients. Loyalty (A), price advice (B), and confidentiality protecting the buyer's information (D) are duties owed only to represented clients, not to third parties.
---
Q5. Under RCW 18.86, which duty requires a Washington broker to recommend consulting a structural engineer when the buyer is interested in a 100-year-old commercial building and the broker has no expertise in commercial construction issues?
A) Duty of loyalty B) Duty of good faith to all parties C) Referral duty — the broker must recommend specialists when their own expertise is insufficient D) Duty to disclose actually known material defects
Answer: C — The referral duty requires brokers to recognize the limits of their expertise and recommend specialists when those limits are reached. A residential broker without commercial construction knowledge should refer the client to a structural engineer and possibly a commercial real estate specialist rather than proceeding without adequate expertise.