The check bounced. Washington's dishonored-check statute changes the math.
Washington's dishonored-check statute, RCW 62A.3-520, is one of the rare collection statutes that supplies its own fee shift and statutory penalty regardless of what the underlying agreement says. The structure: when a check is dishonored for nonsufficient funds or stopped without justification, the holder may serve a statutory notice on the maker. If the maker does not pay the face amount plus the handling fee within fifteen days, the holder may sue for the face amount plus statutory damages of up to three times the face amount (capped at $300), plus reasonable attorney fees and costs. The notice procedure is technical, but on a clean facts file it is the most efficient pre-litigation tool in the Washington collection toolkit.
What RCW 62A.3-520 actually does
Under RCW 62A.3-520, when a check is dishonored, the maker is liable to the holder for the face amount of the check plus a handling fee not exceeding $40, plus interest accruing on the face amount. If the holder serves the statutory notice in the form specified by the statute and the maker fails to pay within the fifteen-day notice window, the holder may then recover statutory damages of up to three times the face amount of the check (subject to the $300 cap), plus reasonable attorney fees and costs of suit. The treble-damages remedy and the fee-shifting remedy are statutory; they do not require any underlying contract provision. The maker has an affirmative defense if the check was returned in error or for circumstances beyond the maker's control, but the burden is on the maker.
The notice form matters
The statute specifies the language and content of the notice. The notice must identify the check (date, amount, drawee bank, check number), state that the check was returned, demand payment of the face amount plus the handling fee, state the fifteen-day window, and warn that failure to pay may result in suit for up to three times the face value plus attorney fees. Improvising the notice format is the most common mistake. The notice should track the statutory language closely; a notice that omits required content may not trigger the treble-damages remedy even if the maker still does not pay.
Why this works on small-dollar files where nothing else does
On a $200 bounced check from a service customer, ordinary collection economics do not work: the principal is too small for an attorney letter, small claims is slow, and the underlying contract probably has no fee clause. The dishonored-check statute is purpose-built for exactly this fact pattern. The $40 handling fee makes the maker whole on the bank charge, the $300 statutory penalty triples a $100 check, and the statutory fee shift means the holder's attorney costs are recoverable from the maker. For files between roughly $100 and $1,000 where the maker is solvent, this is the strongest pre-litigation tool. Above $1,000, the $300 cap becomes a smaller percentage of the recovery, and the standard unpaid-invoice analysis dominates.
What the dishonored-check demand letter should do
- Track the statutory notice form: identify the check (date, amount, drawee, check number), state that the check was returned for NSF or stop payment, demand the face amount plus the handling fee, state the fifteen-day window, and warn of the statutory penalty and fee shift.
- Attach the front and back of the dishonored check, the bank's NSF or stop-payment notice, and any other returned-check documentation.
- State the underlying transaction briefly (what the check was tendered for) and confirm the goods or services were delivered.
- Specify the payment method and address for the cure: certified funds, cashier's check, or wire transfer; payment must be received (not just sent) within fifteen days.
- Reserve the right to pursue treble damages, attorney fees, and costs of suit if the cure does not happen.
- Send certified mail with return receipt to the maker at the address on the check (and to any home address known); the certified-mail receipt is the proof of notice the statute requires.
Verify the maker's identity and assets first
The treble-damages remedy is only useful if the maker has assets a judgment can reach. A $300 statutory penalty on a $100 check is leverage on a solvent maker; it is paperwork on a judgment-proof one. Before sending the notice, run the usual collection diligence: is the maker employed, does the maker own real property, is there a business that owes the maker money. The notice is cheap to send; the lawsuit on a non-paying defendant is not.
Documents to upload before the letter goes out
- The front and back of the dishonored check.
- The bank notice showing NSF, stopped payment, account closed, or other reason for dishonor.
- The date you learned of dishonor.
- The underlying invoice, receipt, or contract showing what the check was tendered for.
- Any communications with the maker about the dishonor (acknowledgments, promises to make good, denials).
- The maker's current address and any employer or business information available.
When this becomes worth hiring an attorney
- Face amount between roughly $100 and $1,000, where the statutory penalty is a meaningful percentage.
- A solvent maker with reachable assets or wages.
- A clean NSF or stop-payment record (not a check legitimately returned in error).
For larger amounts, the dishonored-check statute is still useful as a layered theory on top of the underlying breach claim, but the standard unpaid-invoice analysis tends to dominate the demand letter at higher dollar levels.
What I review when you send the file
I read the bank notice first to confirm the dishonor was NSF or unjustified stop payment (the basis for the statute), then the underlying transaction record to confirm delivery, then the maker's contact and asset information. I form a view on whether the statutory notice is the right move standalone or whether it should be layered onto a broader demand letter.
Primary sources
- RCW 62A.3-520: dishonored-check statutory notice; face amount, handling fee, treble damages capped at $300, attorney fees and costs.
- RCW 19.52.010: 12 percent default interest.
- RCW 4.84.330: reciprocal attorney-fee statute on underlying contract.
This page is an educational resource. Sergei Tokmakov is a California attorney (CA Bar #279869) currently seeking admission to the Washington State Bar.