Washington

All-party consent

Washington is an all-party consent jurisdiction: every participant must consent before the conversation may be recorded.

The part that catches people out

Our reading, not verified text. Everything in this section is editorial judgment about how the statute works. Unlike the statute above, the reading itself has not been checked against a source.

Washington is an all-party state whose own statute lets one party satisfy it alone. RCW 9.73.030(3) deems consent obtained 'whenever one party has announced to all other parties… that such communication or conversation is about to be recorded' — and, uniquely, requires that the announcement itself be recorded. At the point of decision an investigator is closer to a notice rule than to a consent one. Separately, § 9.73.030(2) permits one-party recording of conversations conveying threats of extortion, blackmail or bodily harm, or made anonymously, repeatedly, or at an extremely inconvenient hour — which is the provision that matters when claims staff record a hostile caller.

Where this comes from

Federal floor

Federal law permits recording with one party's consent unless the recording is made to commit a crime or tort. Federal law is the FLOOR; a state may and many do require more. Where an interstate call touches two states with different rules, the safe assumption is the stricter one. See 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d).

Reference information, not legal advice. Statutes change and courts read them differently; confirm the current text with the linked primary source and counsel licensed in the jurisdiction before relying on it.

All jurisdictions · This page as JSON · How this is verified · Terms of reuse

Found an error, or a statute that has moved? Tell us — a citation with the correction gets it into the next revision.