At the second show cause hearing both parties were present and Mattler and Tedford
testified. Their testimony mainly related to disputes over the duration of the lease.
Mattler and Tedford also testified as to the retaliation defense. When Tedford was asked
about why she served Guy and Mattler with the 20-day notice to terminate the tenancy, she
testified:
A. I was mostly upset that I couldn’t have an original lease agreement.
Q. At the time you issued the termination, had you – had the tenants tendered two
NSF1 checks to you?
A. Yes.
Q. And at that time, they had not paid their deposit; is that correct?
A. By that time, she didn’t issue me a second original lease agreement. I said,
“You know what, I think I’m done.” And so I said, “Just move out, you don’t need
a deposit.” When I came home, I said, “[my attorney] said no, no, no, you need to
get a deposit.” And so then we said, “Okay, going to make it with a deposit. When
you move out, you get your deposit back.”
CP at 246-47. Tedford also testified that she terminated the tenancy because she never received
the original lease agreement, not because of Guy’s and Mattler’s request.
In addition to her testimony about the duration of the lease agreement, Mattler testified
about the late rent payments and stated that they were current on their rent on April 18, the date
Tedford served the 20-day notice to terminate the tenancy. Mattler also stated in her declaration
that the security deposit had not yet been due on April 18.
At the conclusion of Mattler’s testimony, the commissioner had the following discussion
with Guy’s and Mattler’s attorney,
1
NSF stands for non-sufficient funds.
4
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 52222-5-II