Background
Andrew Radulescu and Justin Green obtained class certification and a default judgment exceeding $2.6 million against their former employer, West Coast Security, based on claims for unpaid wages and related employment violations. Seeking to collect the judgment under Washington’s Wage Recovery Act, they recorded liens against properties where class members allegedly had provided security services.
The liens against properties owned by Portsmith Apartments LLC and Sunrise Lane Apartments LLC named Radulescu and Green as claimants on behalf of themselves and similarly situated workers, but did not identify the individual class members who had worked at either property. Radulescu and Green themselves had not worked at those locations. The superior court concluded that the class representatives could record the liens and that the notices substantially complied with the statute, then denied the property owners’ CR 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. The Court of Appeals accepted discretionary review.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals held that the Wage Recovery Act permits class representatives to record wage liens on behalf of class members who possess valid lien rights. Reading the statute as a whole, the court concluded that its references to an authorized “representative” include a class representative and that the legislature did not require each class member to record a separate lien before pursuing classwide foreclosure.
But the court also held that a class-filed lien must satisfy RCW 60.90.030’s content requirements. Because the substantive lien belongs to the worker who maintained the encumbered property, the recorded notice must identify that worker and provide the required claimant information. The notices here named only the class representatives and did not identify the class members who worked at each property. The liens therefore were unauthorized, and the court reversed the denial of the property owners’ motion, directed dismissal of the supplemental complaint, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
Key Takeaways
- A certified class representative may record a Washington wage lien for class members who have valid lien rights.
- The lien notice must identify the individual workers whose labor created the asserted liens; naming only the class representatives and referring generally to similarly situated workers is insufficient.
- Failure to comply with RCW 60.90.030’s claimant-identification requirements defeats the lien and can require dismissal under CR 12(b)(6).
Why It Matters
The decision preserves class representatives’ ability to use the Wage Recovery Act collectively while requiring property-specific disclosure of the workers who possess the underlying lien rights. Class counsel pursuing wage liens must therefore connect each encumbered property to identified class members and include the claimant information required by statute.
For property owners, the ruling confirms that the Act’s notice requirements provide essential information for evaluating and promptly challenging an asserted encumbrance, particularly given the statute’s expedited foreclosure and show-cause procedures.