This bill adds a new section to chapter 48.30 RCW that makes it unlawful for any person to solicit, coerce, require, or contract with an insured to enter into a post-loss assignment agreement that transfers post-loss property insurance benefits (including rights of action or insurer proceeds) from the insured to another person. Such assignment agreements are declared void and unenforceable. The bill creates statutory exceptions for assignments to a licensed public adjuster retained under a written agreement to represent only the policyholder, an attorney retained under a written contingency agreement permitted by professional conduct rules, assignments or transfers to a federally insured financial institution, mortgagee, or subsequent purchaser of the property, and for liability coverage under personal or commercial insurance. The bill also clarifies it does not prevent an insured from authorizing or directing payment to, or paying, a person for services, materials, or other covered items. The insurance commissioner is authorized, on cause to believe a violation occurred, to take enforcement actions under RCW 48.02.080 and may impose a civil fine of $50,000 per violation, with fines deposited to the state general fund via the state treasurer. The bill includes legislative findings explaining post-loss assignments and the distinction from direct-payment authorizations. Definitions for "assignment agreement," "property insurance," and "public adjuster" are provided by reference to RCW 48.11.040 and RCW 48.17.010. Missing or unclear items in the provided text include the exact new section citation within chapter 48.30 RCW, the full contents of the referenced RCWs (including the specific enforcement authorities in RCW 48.02.080), any effective date or transitional rules, and definitions for the terms "person" and "insured."

If enacted, the bill would stop restoration, mitigation, and similar service providers from obtaining post‑loss assignments that transfer a homeowner’s property insurance benefits to the provider, making those assignment agreements void. Homeowners would still be able to direct or authorize payments for services, and licensed public adjusters, attorneys on contingency, federally insured lenders or mortgagees, and liability insurance claims remain exceptions. The insurance commissioner would be able to investigate suspected violations and levy fines of $50,000 per violation, with collected fines going to the state general fund. Practically, contractors and other vendors who have relied on assignments of benefits would likely lose a common way to secure payment and could face more upfront billing, collection costs, or the need to contract differently; insurers would see more claims controlled directly by policyholders; public adjusters and contingency attorneys keep their existing options; and the Office of the Insurance Commissioner would take on enforcement workload and fine collection. Important details are missing here—such as the exact new code section, the full scope of enforcement powers referenced, definitions of some terms, and any effective date—so timing and some enforcement mechanics remain unclear.