Last updated 2026-07-09
TL;DR
Washington's Consumer Protection Act (RCW 19.86) and its Automatic Dialing and Announcing Device statute (RCW 80.36.400) layer state penalties on top of federal TCPA rules. Violations can trigger $500 to $2,000 per call in statutory damages, attorney's fees, and class actions. Washington also has its own Do Not Call list for intrastate calls. Callers must understand both state and federal rules before dialing any Washington number.
What is Washington's Consumer Protection Act and why do cold callers need to know about it?
Washington's Consumer Protection Act, codified at RCW 19.86, is the state's main unfair and deceptive trade practices statute [1]. It is not a telemarketing-specific law, but courts and the Washington Attorney General have applied it broadly to cold calling, robocalling, and any deceptive sales outreach that reaches Washington residents.
The CPA makes "unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce" unlawful [1]. Violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act or Washington's own calling statutes are treated as per se violations of the CPA in many cases, meaning the plaintiff does not have to separately prove the practice was unfair. It's already decided.
Why does this matter for outbound teams? Because the CPA carries its own private right of action. Consumers can sue directly, and if they win they collect actual damages or a statutory minimum (whichever is higher), court costs, and attorney's fees. The attorney's fees provision is the dangerous part. It means plaintiff lawyers take Washington CPA cases on contingency for small dollar amounts that would otherwise be uneconomic to litigate. A few robocalls can fund a lawsuit.
The state AG can also bring actions under the CPA and seek civil penalties, restitution, and injunctive relief. That's a separate exposure from consumer lawsuits. The combined risk for a company that ignores Washington's rules is meaningfully worse than ignoring a state with no private right of action.
What specific Washington statutes govern telemarketing and robocalls?
Three statutes do most of the work in Washington, and they overlap.
RCW 80.36.400 is Washington's Automatic Dialing and Announcing Device (ADAD) law [2]. It prohibits using any automatic dialing and announcing device to deliver a prerecorded message to any telephone number without the prior consent of the called party. The statute gives the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) authority to regulate ADADs, and violators face fines from the UTC in addition to private suits.
RCW 19.158 is Washington's Telephone Solicitation Law, sometimes called the Commercial Telephone Solicitation Act [3]. It sets conduct rules for commercial telephone solicitors including registration requirements, required disclosures, and prohibited practices. Solicitors must register with the Washington Secretary of State before making calls to Washington residents for commercial purposes.
RCW 19.86 is the Consumer Protection Act described above. It picks up any deceptive or unfair practice not already covered by the other two statutes and gives both the AG and private citizens a cause of action [1].
Federal TCPA rules under 47 U.S.C. § 227 run concurrently [4]. Washington courts have held that state and federal claims can be pled together, which lets a plaintiff stack theories. An outbound team that makes one illegal robocall to a Washington cell phone may face an ADAD claim, a CPA claim, and a TCPA claim at once, all from the same call.
How do Washington's penalties compare to federal TCPA penalties?
Here is the honest comparison. Federal TCPA statutory damages are $500 per violation for negligent violations, and up to $1,500 per violation for willful or knowing violations [4]. Washington's CPA allows actual damages or a statutory minimum that courts have interpreted to reach $2,000 per violation in some decisions, plus mandatory attorney's fees for prevailing plaintiffs [1].
Washington's ADAD statute (RCW 80.36.400) separately empowers the UTC to impose administrative fines, which have historically run up to $1,000 per call for regulated carriers [2].
The attorney's fees provision in the CPA is what actually drives litigation economics. At the federal level, TCPA class actions are common partly because attorney's fees come from a common fund. Under Washington's CPA, attorney's fees attach even to individual claims, so a plaintiff attorney can take a single-consumer case with a few hundred dollars of statutory damages and recover full fees from the defendant if they win. That is a fundamentally different risk than states where fee-shifting does not apply.
| Claim type | Damages per violation | Attorney's fees | Class actions? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Federal TCPA (47 USC 227) | $500 (negligent) / $1,500 (willful) | No automatic fee shift | Yes, common |
| WA CPA (RCW 19.86) | Actual or statutory (up to $2,000) | Yes, mandatory if plaintiff wins | Yes |
| WA ADAD (RCW 80.36.400) | UTC fines up to $1,000 | Regulatory, not private | UTC action |
| WA Telephone Solicitation (RCW 19.158) | CPA damages attach | Yes via CPA | Yes |
No good publicly available dataset tracks average Washington CPA telemarketing settlements specifically. For TCPA settlements nationally, cases involving improper robocalls have settled in the $8 to $16 per class member range in large class actions. Individual Washington CPA cases tend to resolve for higher per-call amounts because the fee-shifting rule hands the plaintiff a stronger negotiating position.
Does Washington have its own Do Not Call list?
Yes. Washington maintains a state Do Not Call list administered by the Washington UTC [9]. The state list covers intrastate calls (calls that both originate and terminate within Washington). Out-of-state callers to Washington numbers are primarily governed by the federal National Do Not Call Registry maintained by the FTC [5].
In practice, most outbound sales teams calling Washington from another state need to scrub against the federal registry. Pure intrastate callers, such as a local Seattle roofing company calling Seattle homeowners, must also scrub the state list. To be safe, any company regularly calling Washington numbers should scrub both.
The federal DNC registry is available from the FTC's telemarketing compliance portal. Subscription costs depend on how many area codes you need: the first five area codes are free, and each additional area code runs $81 per year as of 2024, with a full national subscription at roughly $21,509 per year [5]. Washington has eleven 3-digit area codes in active use, so the incremental cost is small.
You can learn more about scrubbing requirements in our guide to the do not call list and our overview of the do not call telemarketer list for business subscribers.
Washington also gives consumers who receive calls in violation of state law a private right to sue even if their number is only on the federal list, because the CPA treats the federal violation as a per se state violation. So the list you scrub against matters less than the fact that you scrub against something.
What consent rules apply to calling Washington consumers?
Washington follows federal TCPA consent rules as a floor, then adds state requirements on top.
For autodialed or prerecorded calls to cell phones, federal TCPA requires prior express written consent [4]. The FCC's 2023 one-to-one consent rule requires that consent be given to a specific seller, not aggregated across a lead form that lists dozens of companies [6]. Washington callers using lead-generation vendors should audit how that consent is captured and documented.
For prerecorded calls to residential landlines, federal TCPA requires prior express consent. Washington's ADAD statute (RCW 80.36.400) tracks this but phrases it as "prior consent of the called party" without the written requirement, so best practice is written consent for all recorded-message calls regardless of line type [2].
Washington's Telephone Solicitation Act (RCW 19.158) adds a disclosure requirement: solicitors must clearly state their name, the company they represent, and the purpose of the call near the start [3]. Failing this disclosure is a standalone violation that can trigger CPA liability.
One area where Washington is stricter than federal law in practice: the state courts have been skeptical of generic "I agree to receive calls" consent buried in long terms of service. The closer the consent language tracks what the FCC requires for express written consent, the better the defense. A sentence that says "I consent to receive autodialed or prerecorded marketing calls at the number provided" holds up far better than checkbox consent to generic "contact."
Our broader article on cold calling covers federal consent rules that apply alongside these state requirements.
Does Washington's law apply to B2B cold calls?
Mostly no, with important exceptions.
Washington's Telephone Solicitation Act (RCW 19.158) applies to "commercial telephone solicitation" aimed at consumers [3]. Business-to-business calls to a company's business line generally fall outside its scope. The same principle applies under the federal TCPA, which is more protective of residential and cell numbers than business lines.
But the exceptions matter. If you are calling a sole proprietor, freelancer, or small business owner on their personal cell phone, Washington courts may treat that call as reaching a consumer, not a business. The analysis turns on whether the phone is personal or purely commercial and whether the called party holds it out for business use. There is no bright line here, and frankly nobody has clear appellate guidance in Washington specifically on this point.
The Washington CPA's unfair practices prong is broader and does technically apply to B2B conduct in some circumstances, particularly if the practice affects the public interest. Systematic deceptive calling campaigns, even to businesses, have been pursued under CPA theories by the AG.
Practical advice: if your list includes cell numbers pulled from any consumer-facing source (social media, consumer data brokers, public records of individuals), treat those numbers as consumer numbers regardless of your intent. The risk of misclassification is yours.
What are the registration requirements for telephone solicitors in Washington?
RCW 19.158 requires commercial telephone solicitors to register with the Washington Secretary of State before making solicitation calls to Washington residents [3]. This is a real administrative step that many small outbound teams skip, usually because they did not know it existed.
Registration requires submitting a form, a registration fee (historically in the $500 range, though you should verify the current fee with the Secretary of State's office directly), and information about the company's officers and principals [10]. Certain exemptions apply, including calls to existing customers, calls from charitable organizations, and calls where no sale is solicited during the initial call.
Failure to register is itself a violation of RCW 19.158, which feeds into CPA liability. An unregistered solicitor who also violates calling hours or scrubbing rules faces compounded exposure.
The registration requirement is often the first thing a plaintiff attorney checks. If your company has been calling Washington and is not registered, that is a fact that could appear in a demand letter or complaint before you ever get to arguing about consent or list scrubbing.
If you call Washington regularly and are not clearly within an exemption, register. The cost is low. The downside of skipping it is not.
What calling hours and conduct rules apply in Washington?
Federal TCPA rules restrict telemarketing calls to between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. local time of the called party [4]. Washington's Telephone Solicitation Act tracks this window and may impose additional conduct restrictions.
Under RCW 19.158, solicitors must [3]:
- Identify themselves and their company immediately upon the call being answered
- State the purpose of the call before making any sales pitch
- Honor any request to be placed on a company-specific do not call list immediately
- Not use deceptive or misleading statements about the product, price, or offer
The company-specific DNC requirement is worth pausing on. When a Washington consumer says "don't call me again," that is a legally binding opt-out. You need a process to record it, propagate it to your dialer within a reasonable time (federal rules say 30 days), and ensure the number is suppressed on future campaigns. Failing to suppress a number after an explicit opt-out request is one of the cleanest TCPA and CPA violations there is.
Caller ID spoofing, which includes transmitting a number that does not correspond to your actual origination point or that is not a working number that can be called back, is also prohibited under both the federal Truth in Caller ID Act and Washington state law. Display a real number. That's not negotiable.
How has Washington AG enforcement of telemarketing laws actually worked?
The Washington AG's Consumer Protection Division actively pursues telemarketing cases [7]. A couple of patterns show the range.
The AG has settled with home improvement and sales companies over alleged violations of the Telephone Solicitation Act, including failure to register and calling consumers on the Do Not Call list. Those settlements have included injunctive relief and civil penalties [7].
The AG's office has also joined multi-state actions coordinated with the FTC targeting robocall operations. Washington has participated in enforcement pushes against companies making billions of illegal robocalls, and those efforts produced injunctions and civil judgments, though collection against fly-by-night robocall operations is often limited [7].
Private litigation in Washington has been more fertile ground than AG enforcement for plaintiffs. The CPA's attorney's fees provision and the state's active plaintiff's bar have generated steady case flow against real outbound sales organizations, more than scammers.
The typical Washington CPA telemarketing defendant is not a fraudulent operation. It is a legitimate company with a compliance gap: an expired scrub, an undocumented consent workflow, or a sales team that did not honor opt-outs. That profile fits most mid-sized outbound sales organizations.
How does Washington's law interact with the federal TCPA?
Federal TCPA preemption does not wipe out state calling laws. The TCPA explicitly allows states to impose more restrictive requirements: "State law is preempted only to the extent it is inconsistent with this section, and this section does not preempt any State law that imposes more restrictive intrastate requirements or regulations on, or which prohibits, such activities." [4]
Washington has used that opening. Its ADAD statute, CPA, and Telephone Solicitation Act each add requirements the TCPA does not impose, including registration, specific disclosure language, and a private attorney's fees right. Courts in the Western District of Washington have regularly permitted plaintiffs to bring concurrent federal TCPA and state CPA claims arising from the same calls.
What this means operationally: your TCPA compliance program is necessary but not sufficient for Washington. A company that is 100% TCPA-compliant can still violate Washington law if it is not registered, if it misses a required call disclosure, or if it calls a number on the state DNC list.
For companies using lead generation vendors or consent aggregators, the FCC's 2023 one-to-one consent order [6] is the most significant recent development. That rule requires that written consent for autodialed calls identify the specific seller receiving consent. Broad "partner" consent is gone. Washington consumers who gave consent under an old lead form that listed dozens of sellers now have strong arguments that prior consent to any of those sellers was invalid.
Our overview of TCPA basics covers the federal framework in more depth.
What should a small outbound team do right now to comply with Washington's rules?
Here is what I would actually do if I were running compliance for a small team that calls Washington numbers.
First, check registration. Go to the Washington Secretary of State's website and verify whether your company is registered as a commercial telephone solicitor [10]. If you are exempt (existing customer calls only, for example), document the basis for the exemption in writing. If you are not exempt and not registered, file registration before the next calling campaign.
Second, scrub both lists. Run your Washington numbers against the federal DNC registry and against the Washington state list through the UTC [9]. Set a calendar reminder to re-scrub every 31 days at minimum. Federal rules require scrubbing within 31 days of download [5].
Third, audit your consent documentation. For any autodialed or recorded calls, you need written consent that names your company. Post-January 2025, catch-all partner consent from a lead aggregator is not enough under federal rules, and Washington courts will treat that the same way.
Fourth, build an opt-out process that propagates within 24 hours. If a consumer says stop, that request needs to reach your dialer suppression list before the next campaign drops, not after.
Fifth, train your agents on the required disclosure script. RCW 19.158 requires name, company, and purpose at the start of every call. That takes about 10 seconds. Skipping it is a violation.
LeadCompliant's free compliance kit has consent documentation templates and a call script disclosure checklist built for small outbound teams that can serve as a starting point for each of these steps.
The biggest mistake small teams make is treating Washington as identical to other states. It is not. The private attorney's fees provision changes the litigation math completely. A plaintiff attorney who wins a CPA case in Washington gets paid even if the underlying damages are modest. That is what makes Washington one of the highest-risk states for outbound callers.
What defenses actually work if you get a Washington CPA telemarketing claim?
Three defenses have real traction in Washington telemarketing cases.
Documented prior express written consent is the strongest. If you have a time-stamped, specific, individualized consent record that names your company, gives the consumer's signature (electronic is fine), and tracks to the exact number called, that kills most claims at summary judgment. Courts have found for defendants on this basis repeatedly. The problem is that many companies cannot produce clean consent records.
The established business relationship (EBR) defense still applies under federal TCPA for residential landline calls (but not cell phones) [4]. Washington does not have a separate EBR definition, so the federal standard governs: an existing customer or someone who has inquired within 18 months (purchases) or 3 months (inquiries). This defense is narrower than most sales teams think.
Bona fide error is a TCPA defense under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5): a caller who makes a call in error despite maintaining reasonable procedures is not liable. This defense requires that you actually have written procedures, trained staff, and maintained an updated DNC scrub. Courts scrutinize these procedures hard. Saying "we had procedures" without documentation of what those procedures were loses.
What does not work: arguing you did not know Washington had different rules. Ignorance of state law is not a defense to a CPA claim. Neither is pointing to a vendor contract that says the vendor guaranteed list compliance. You are the caller. The regulatory exposure is yours.
If you receive a demand letter alleging Washington CPA violations, get a lawyer with TCPA experience before responding. The way you respond to a demand letter shapes your settlement position more than anything else. Cases that end with low settlements usually start with a defendant who quickly produced consent documentation.
Frequently asked questions
Is Washington's Consumer Protection Act the same as the TCPA?
No. The federal TCPA (47 U.S.C. § 227) governs telemarketing calls nationally, with FCC and FTC enforcement. Washington's CPA (RCW 19.86) is a state unfair practices statute that applies broadly to any trade or commerce in Washington. Violations of the TCPA are often treated as per se CPA violations, so a single call can produce claims under both laws at once.
Do I need to register with Washington before making sales calls there?
Yes, if you are making commercial telephone solicitations to Washington residents, RCW 19.158 requires registration with the Washington Secretary of State before calling. Exemptions apply for calls to existing customers, charitable solicitations, and some other categories. If you are unsure whether you qualify for an exemption, contact the Secretary of State's office or a Washington-licensed attorney before your next campaign.
How much can a Washington consumer sue for over an illegal telemarketing call?
Under the Washington CPA, a consumer can recover actual damages or up to $2,000 per violation (whichever is greater) plus mandatory attorney's fees if they prevail. Under the federal TCPA, the range is $500 to $1,500 per call. These claims can be brought together in the same lawsuit, so exposure per call can exceed $3,000 before attorney's fees.
Does Washington have its own Do Not Call list separate from the federal registry?
Yes. The Washington UTC maintains a state DNC list covering intrastate calls. Out-of-state callers must scrub the federal FTC registry. Companies calling Washington should scrub both lists to be safe. The federal list requires re-scrubbing at least every 31 days. Calling a number on either list without a valid exemption or consent can trigger state CPA liability on top of federal TCPA exposure.
Can I still call someone in Washington who gave consent through a lead aggregator?
It depends on when consent was given and how. Under the FCC's one-to-one consent rule, written consent for autodialed calls must name the specific seller, not a group of partners. Lead form consent that listed dozens of companies is no longer valid for calls made under the rule. Review your lead sources and confirm that any Washington numbers have consent that specifically names your company.
Are B2B cold calls to Washington businesses covered by Washington's telemarketing laws?
Generally no, for calls to a company's business landline. Washington's Telephone Solicitation Act targets consumer solicitations. But calling a sole proprietor or small business owner on their personal cell phone may still trigger consumer protections. If your list includes personal cell numbers sourced from consumer databases, treat those as consumer numbers regardless of your intent to pitch a business offer.
What time can I legally call Washington consumers?
Federal TCPA rules restrict telemarketing calls to 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. local time of the called party, and Washington's Telephone Solicitation Act tracks this window. Always calculate time based on the consumer's local time zone, not your own. Calls to a Washington number at 7:45 a.m. Pacific are illegal even if your team is in a different time zone where that is within business hours.
What disclosure do I need to make at the start of every call to a Washington consumer?
Under RCW 19.158, you must clearly state your name, the name of the company you represent, and the purpose of the call near the beginning of the call. This applies before any sales pitch. Failing this disclosure is a standalone violation of the Telephone Solicitation Act, which can feed into CPA liability and attorney's fees exposure. Train your agents on a short standard opening script.
How long does a company have to honor an opt-out request from a Washington consumer?
Federal TCPA regulations require that company-specific do not call requests be honored within 30 days and maintained for at least five years. Washington CPA claims can attach to any call made after a consumer has clearly requested no further contact. Best practice is to suppress the number within 24 hours of the request. A call made even once after a documented opt-out is one of the easiest TCPA and CPA violations to prove.
Can Washington consumers bring class action lawsuits over telemarketing calls?
Yes. Both the federal TCPA and Washington's CPA permit class actions. Washington CPA class actions are particularly viable because the attorney's fees provision applies at the class level, making even small per-member damages economically attractive for plaintiff attorneys. Large-scale robocall campaigns that touch many Washington residents are the highest class action risk scenario.
What does the Washington AG do about telemarketing violations?
The Washington AG's Consumer Protection Division can investigate, seek injunctions, civil penalties, and restitution under the CPA. The AG also joins multi-state enforcement coalitions with the FTC targeting large robocall operations. Smaller businesses are more commonly reached through private plaintiff lawsuits than AG action, but persistent patterns of violations can attract AG attention, especially after consumer complaints.
Does Washington's law cover text message marketing as well as phone calls?
Yes. The Washington CPA's unfair practices provisions and the federal TCPA both apply to text messages sent using autodialing technology. Text messages to Washington numbers require the same prior express written consent as autodialed calls. The same DNC scrubbing obligations apply. Compliance for outbound texting to Washington residents is essentially parallel to call compliance.
What is the statute of limitations for a Washington CPA telemarketing claim?
Washington's CPA has a four-year statute of limitations under RCW 19.86.120. The federal TCPA has a four-year limitations period as well under the general federal statute of limitations for actions created by Congress. This means a company can face claims for calls made up to four years ago. Consent records, call logs, and DNC scrub documentation should be retained for at least five years.
Does spoofing caller ID violate Washington law?
Yes. Transmitting false or misleading caller ID information violates both the federal Truth in Caller ID Act and Washington's CPA prohibition on deceptive practices. Using a disconnected number or a number that cannot be called back is independently problematic under FCC regulations. Display a real number that can receive calls. Spoofing adds a deception theory to any underlying calling violation and makes settlements more expensive.
Sources
- Washington State Legislature, RCW 19.86 Consumer Protection Act: RCW 19.86 prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce and allows private suits with attorney's fees.
- Washington State Legislature, RCW 80.36.400 Automatic dialing and announcing devices: RCW 80.36.400 prohibits use of automatic dialing and announcing devices without prior consent and grants the Washington UTC regulatory authority over such devices.
- Washington State Legislature, RCW 19.158 Commercial Telephone Solicitation: RCW 19.158 requires commercial telephone solicitors to register with the Washington Secretary of State and disclose their name, company, and purpose at the start of calls.
- U.S. Government, 47 U.S.C. § 227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act: 47 U.S.C. § 227 restricts autodialed and prerecorded calls, sets $500-$1,500 per violation statutory damages, and explicitly permits states to impose more restrictive requirements.
- Federal Trade Commission, National Do Not Call Registry for businesses: The FTC operates the National Do Not Call Registry; the first five area codes are free, additional area codes cost $81 per year, and a full national subscription runs about $21,509 per year as of 2024, with 31-day scrubbing required.
- Washington State Office of the Attorney General, Consumer Protection: The Washington AG's Consumer Protection Division actively pursues telemarketing violations including failure to register and calling consumers on the Do Not Call list, and joins multi-state robocall enforcement actions.
- Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, Consumer information: The Washington UTC administers the state Do Not Call list and has authority to impose fines on violators of ADAD rules.
- Washington Secretary of State, Corporations and Charities: Commercial telephone solicitors must register with the Washington Secretary of State before making solicitation calls to Washington residents.
- Washington State Legislature, RCW 19.86.120 Limitation of actions: Washington CPA claims have a four-year statute of limitations.