If you allow someone who is down on their luck stay with you free of charge, it may be trickier than you think to get them out.
There is no bright line rule to define when someone has established residency. Essentially it simply means they live there. An overnight guest, for example, has not established residency. On the other hand, someone who has lived in a place for an extended period and everyone would agree “lives” there has established residency. Obviously there can be gray areas in this inquiry.
If someone has established residency, you cannot just kick them out. Law enforcement may allow a person who has established residency to break and enter. You must have a court order to remove people who have established residency.
You might be able to get a protection order, if applicable. This is difficult to get unless there is violence or threats of violence. Otherwise, you must seek to evict the person through one of the forms of eviction actions.
Ordinarily, a landlord uses a legal process called an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant. “Unlawful detainer” is a statutorily defined status. Before enactment of unlawful detainer statutes landlords had to resort to a common law action called an ejectment action.
Long ago unlawful detainer statutes were enacted under criminal codes in various states.[1] Thus statutes in many states, including Washington, are couched in language of a person being “guilty” of unlawful detainer if one or more of a list of situations apply (failure to pay rent after three days notice, etc.). However, the action is a civil action, and no longer a part of any criminal code.
To use the unlawful detainer action process, the person being evicted must fall under one of the statutory definitions of “unlawful detainer” status.[2] A person who is in another’s property with permission of the owner or legal occupier (such as a tenant) but whose possession is terminable at any time without cause or notice is under Washington law a tenant-at-will.
A tenant-at-will is a status not covered by the unlawful detainer process. Therefore, the person entitled to possession who wants a tenant-at-will removed must bring an ejectment action, not an unlawful detainer action.[3]
An ejectment action is not desirable for the person seeking to evict another, because an ejecment action may take longer, and there is no subject matter limitation on defenses or counterclaims.
There may be some legal arguments and strategies available to avoid having to bring the ejectment action. You should consult with an attorney as this is a nuanced area of law.
[1] Schoshinski, American Law of Landlord and Tenant §6:10(1980).
[2] RCW 59.12.030. Turner v. White, 20 Wn. App. 290, 579 P.2d 410 (1978). 1 Wash. State Bar Ass’n, Washington Real Property Deskbook § 17.12(2)(c)(i) (4th ed. 2009).
[3] Turner v. White, 20 Wn. App. 290, 579 P.2d 410 (1978).