Dismissal, almost without exception
If a personal injury lawsuit is filed in Washington after the applicable statute of limitations has run — the general three-year deadline under RCW 4.16.080(2), or a government entity's own notice requirement — courts reject the lawsuit as time-barred. This happens regardless of how strong the underlying claim actually is.
A genuinely confusing history worth untangling
Washington's government notice framework has a real, documented history of legislative attempts followed by Supreme Court reversals — a 120-day state notice period struck down as an unconstitutional disguised statute of limitations, and later, a 90-day malpractice-specific presuit notice struck down for violating separation of powers. Someone relying on an older article describing either of these invalidated rules could genuinely miscalculate what's currently required, in either direction.
Courts apply the current, valid deadlines strictly
Despite this history of legislative back-and-forth, the deadlines that remain valid today are still enforced strictly. Being close to a deadline, or confused about which version of a notice rule currently applies, isn't on its own a basis for a Washington court to excuse a late filing.
Negotiations end along with the legal leverage behind them
Separately, once the statute of limitations has actually run, an insurance company has no legal obligation to keep negotiating, to make any offer, or to pay anything at all — even if settlement talks were active and seemingly productive right up until the deadline passed.
If there's any doubt at all
Because Washington's government claims framework has genuinely changed over time through repeated court challenges, confirming the exact, currently valid deadline that applies to a specific claim with a licensed Washington attorney as early as possible is the only reliable way to avoid losing a valid claim on a technicality.