The bill creates a new criminal prohibition in a new section of chapter 40.16 RCW making it a gross misdemeanor for a person to cause a record to be communicated to the filing office if (1) the person is not authorized to file under specified UCC provisions, (2) the record is not related to an existing or anticipated transaction governed by Article 62A.9A, and (3) the record was communicated with intent to harass or defraud the person identified as debtor. It also amends RCW 62A.9A-510 and RCW 62A.9A-516 and adds a new Article 62A.9A section titled "Termination of Wrongfully Filed Financing Statement; Reinstatement," so the bill both creates new law (a criminal prohibition and a new Article section) and modifies existing filing law and procedures. The new Article 62A.9A section establishes a civil administrative procedure for persons identified as debtors to submit a notarized "affidavit of wrongful filing" asserting that a financing statement was unauthorized and was filed to harass or defraud. The filing office must file a termination statement (generally effective 30 days after filing), must provide certified-mail notice to secured parties on the same day, and may not charge a fee for the affidavit or termination statement. If the affidavit concerns a record communicated by a "trusted filer," the office must conduct an expedited administrative review and, if it concludes the filing was made with intent to harass or defraud, it shall file a termination statement effective immediately. Secured parties may request expedited review and may bring a judicial action for reinstatement of the financing statement, which must be filed within six months after the termination statement becomes effective; the office must file notice of being served in such actions within ten days. The bill also clarifies filing effectiveness and the filing office's acceptance/refusal rules in amended RCW 62A.9A-516: a communication of a record plus tender of the filing fee constitutes filing except in specified circumstances (for example, improper communication method, missing required fee, unreadable information, missing required debtor or secured party data, or inability to index). A filing office may refuse certain records, including continuation statements filed outside the six-month continuation window and initial financing statements or debtor-adding amendments the office reasonably believes were caused to be communicated with intent to harass or defraud when not sent by a trusted filer. The filing office is stated to have no duty to form beliefs about intent or to investigate. Some statutory cross-references and part of subsection (b) of RCW 62A.9A-516 are not included in the extracted facts, so certain specific exceptions and the full text of referenced provisions are incomplete or uncertain from the provided material.

If enacted, the bill creates a new criminal deterrent against filing false or harassing financing statements and gives people named as debtors a low-cost, fast way to push the filing office to remove a financing statement by filing a notarized affidavit claiming the filing was wrongful, harassing, or fraudulent. The filing office (the Department of Licensing for its filings) must adopt an affidavit form, file a termination statement without charging a fee, notify secured parties the same day by certified mail (and email if available), and generally has authority to refuse filings it reasonably believes were made to harass or defraud, especially if not submitted by a “trusted filer.” Termination statements normally take effect 30 days after filing unless an expedited administrative review of a trusted filer concludes intent to harass or defraud, in which case termination can be immediate; secured parties can seek expedited review or sue to reinstate a financing statement within six months after termination becomes effective. The most affected actors are the filing office, secured parties, named debtors, trusted filers, and buyers who rely on the public files. The filing office will gain new duties (creating forms, conducting expedited reviews, sending certified notices, and recording reinstatement-related notices) and likely some administrative costs and workflow changes. Secured parties risk sudden loss of public notice and may incur legal or administrative costs to challenge terminations; they must monitor notices and be prepared to seek expedited review or court reinstatement. Debtors gain a no-fee option to remove wrongful filings and a likely faster remedy. Trusted filers get faster review but their filings will be subject to targeted scrutiny. Important details are missing from the excerpts (full definitions of “filing office” and parts of the filing-refusal rules are incomplete), so how some refusal and purchaser-protection rules operate in practice remains unclear.