May a law firm report a client's delinquent account to a credit reporting bureau?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned whether a law firm could disclose delinquent client accounts to a regional credit reporting bureau. The committee was of the opinion that such information would constitute a confidence or secret of the client that could not be disclosed except in compliance with RPC 1.6(a).

The committee was further of the opinion that the disclosure would violate RPC 1.8(b), which prohibits a lawyer representing a client from using information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the client unless the client consents in writing after consultation. It added that RPC 2.3 would also apply: reporting to the bureau would be an evaluation of a matter affecting the client for the use of someone other than the client, which would require, among other things, the client's consent after consultation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a law firm send a client's unpaid bill to a credit reporting bureau?

A: Under this 1989 opinion, not without complying with the confidentiality rule. The committee treated the delinquent account as a confidence or secret protected by RPC 1.6(a).

Q: Which rules did the committee say the disclosure would violate?

A: It identified RPC 1.6(a) (confidences and secrets), RPC 1.8(b) (using client information to the client's disadvantage without written consent), and RPC 2.3 (evaluations for use by a third party), each requiring the client's consent after consultation.

Q: Could client consent change the result?

A: The committee framed the rules in terms of consent: RPC 1.8(b) requires written consent after consultation, and RPC 2.3 requires consent after consultation, so the disclosure turns on obtaining that consent.

Background and rules framework

RPC 1.6(a) protects client confidences and secrets. RPC 1.8(b), Washington's version of ABA Model Rule 1.8(b), bars using information relating to the representation to the client's disadvantage absent the client's written consent after consultation. RPC 2.3, the evaluation rule, governs a lawyer's evaluation of a matter affecting a client for the use of a third person. The committee read all three to bar reporting a delinquent account to a credit bureau without the client's consent.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information)
• ABA Model Rule 1.8(b) (use of client information to client's disadvantage)
• ABA Model Rule 2.3 (evaluation for use by third persons)
• Washington RPC 1.6(a), RPC 1.8(b), RPC 2.3

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1316: Insurance-Defense Counsel and a Coverage-Defeating Secret
• WA Ethics Op. 1298: Undisclosed Trust Account in Bankruptcy

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=398

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning whether your law firm could disclose delinquent client accounts to a regional credit reporting bureau. The Committee was of the opinion that such information would constitute a confidence or secret of your client which could not disclosed except in compliance with RPC 1.6(a). Further, the Committee was of the opinion that the disclosure of such information would constitute a violation of RPC 1.8(b) which prohibits a lawyer who is representing a client in a matter from using information relating to representation of the client to the disadvantage of the client unless the client consents in writing after consultation. In addition, the Committee was of the opinion that RPC 2.3 would also apply and that it would constitute an evaluation of a matter affecting your client for the use of someone other than the client, and thus would require that, among other things, the client consent after consultation.