Several families purchased homes from Quadrant. They were “forced” to sign purchase and sale agreements (PSAs) that contained an arbitration provision. They claimed that they weren’t given the opportunity to review the PSA and that the arbitration clause was unconscionable.
The Court of Appeals held that while arbitration clauses CAN be unconscionable, this case was not an example of either procedural or substantive unconscionability.
The Court left to an arbitrator whether the various claims (some tort and some contractual) were viable in the aftermath of Alejandre v. Bull, 159 Wn.2d 674, 153 P.3d 868 (2007). The Court determined that the tort claims (involving personal injury and damage to property) were outside of the contract and not governed by the PSA. The contract claims, however, were governed by the arbitration clause.
