Ago

Washington Attorney General Reports·Decided January 24, 2007·Published

Opinion

Honorable Dawn Morrell State Representative, 25th District P. O. Box 40600 Olympia, WA 98504-0600

Dear Representative Morrell:

By letter previously acknowledged, you have asked for our opinion on two questions relating to whether RCW 19.60, which regulates pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers, applies to purchasing scrap metal for recycling or further processing. Among other things, RCW 19.60 requires pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers to maintain records about each transaction in which they engage, including the identification of the other party to the transaction and a detailed description of the property involved. RCW 19.60.020. The chapter also requires pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers to make these records available to law enforcement officers and to report to law enforcement whenever they have good reason to believe that property in their possession was previously stolen. RCW 19.60.040. You have asked the following questions:

1. Are individuals in the business of purchasing scrap metal for the purpose of recycling the scrap metal required to abide by the provisions of RCW 19.60.020 and RCW 19.60.040 as they relate to the collection of information and the filing of reports to law enforcement?

2. Are the existing definitions of "metal junk" and "second-hand property" in RCW 19.60.010 sufficiently expansive to include scrap metal being purchased for further processing and recycling?

[original page 2] BRIEF ANSWERS
To the extent that a pawnbroker or second-hand dealer purchases "metal junk" as defined by RCW 19.60.010(2), such transactions are exempt from RCW 19.60 under RCW 19.60.085(4). Existing statutory definitions of "metal junk" and "second-hand property" in RCW 19.60 are not broad enough to include all metal that might be purchased as "scrap metal" for further processing and recycling.

BACKGROUND
Legislation governing pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers in Washington State dates back to the early 1900's. See Laws of 1909, ch. 249, §§ 229-36. Prior to 1984, the requirements were limited and, for the most part, applied only to those businesses operating in cities of the first or second class. Final Bill Rep. on Substitute S.B. 4274, at 1, 48th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash. 1984). This resulted in local governments enacting their own laws governing the dealings of such persons. Id.

The lack of uniformity in the regulation of pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers created significant problems for law enforcement. Id. The Legislature responded in 1984 by enacting uniform statewide legislation regulating pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers. See Laws of 1984, ch. 10, §§ 1-16. This legislation, as amended over the years, is contained in the Pawnbrokers and Second-Hand Dealers Act (Act), RCW 19.60.

Today, all transactions of a pawnbroker or second-hand dealer are subject to the provisions of the Act, with the exception of those transactions that fall within any of the exemptions set forth in RCW 19.60.085. A "transaction" is defined in RCW 19.60.010(8) to include the pledge, purchase, consignment, or trade of any item of personal property from a member of the general public. The term "personal property" is not defined in the statute but takes on its ordinary dictionary meaning of everything that is the subject of ownership not coming under the denomination of real estate. Black's Law Dictionary 1254 (8th ed. 2004).

ANALYSIS
1. Are individuals in the business of purchasing scrap metal for the purpose of recycling the scrap metal required to abide by the provisions of RCW 19.60.020 and RCW 19.60.040 as they relate to the collection of information and the filing of reports to law enforcement?

RCW 19.60.020 requires pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers doing business in Washington to collect certain detailed information regarding all transactions.1 Subsection (1) of [original page 3] this statute provides, among other requirements, the format in which the information must be kept, how long it must be retained, and the requirement for verification by government-issued picture identification of the seller, pledger, or consignor of any goods. Subsection (2) of the statute requires all records of such transactions to be open to inspection by designated law enforcement officers during ordinary business hours, or at reasonable times if ordinary hours of business are not kept, for a period of three years from the date of the transaction.

RCW 19.60.040(1) requires that pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers provide law enforcement (upon request) with a transcript of the record of all transactions conducted on a preceding day. Subsection (2) of this statute requires pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers to report to law enforcement property in their possession they have good cause to believe has been previously lost or stolen. The name of the owner, if known, must accompany such a report, along with the date of receipt of the property and the person from whom it was obtained. RCW 19.60.040(2).

Pawnbrokers and second-hand dealers purchasing scrap metal are required to comply with the requirements set forth in RCW 19.60.020 and .040 unless they fit within one of the exemptions set forth in RCW 19.60.085. This statute provides, in its entirety, as follows:

The provisions of this chapter do not apply to transactions conducted by the following:

(1) Motor vehicle dealers licensed under chapter 46.70 RCW;

(2) Vehicle wreckers or hulk haulers licensed under chapter 46.79 or 46.80 RCW;

(3) Persons giving an allowance for the trade-in or exchange of second-hand property on the purchase of other merchandise of the same kind of greater value; and

(4) Persons in the business of buying or selling empty food and beverage containers or metal or nonmetal junk.

RCW 19.60.085 (emphasis added).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ago, (Wash. 2007).

Ago (Ago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Enmons
410 U.S. 396 (Supreme Court, 1973)
State v. Jacobs
115 P.3d 281 (Washington Supreme Court, 2005)