Washington Votes Forum

Based upon the language on "financial exploitation" and "vulnerable adult" - the account would have to be directly related to a vulnerable adult as defined in the bill and the bank would have to have knowledge of illegal exploitation of that account, such as improperly transferring money out of the bank account, or misuing the vulnerable person in order to obtain that money. It appears to be rather specific. 

The bill states that "If a financial institution reasonably believes that financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult, as defined in RCW 74.34.020"  they can freeze not only the vulnerable adult's account, but also the account of "a person suspected of perpetrating financial exploitation of a vulnerable adult".  One of the forms of exploitation defined in 74.34.020 is "improper" use of the property.  

Hence, with no specific knowledge of exploitation, and based on a subjective opinion of what is "proper" and what is "improper", the financial instutituion can freeze both my accounts and those of my charge.  And the statute gives me no means to seek timely redress.

This is bad law, and I'm against it.