Under the community property system, at least as it existed prior to modification by state statutes, the community is considered as something separate and apart from the members thereof, something in the nature of an entity, although it is not in fact a legal entity. Compare: Stanton v. Everett Trust Savings Bank, 145 Wn. 165, 259 P. 10, 12. Neither the husband nor the wife obtained a title to the community property itself until dissolution of the community and liquidation of the community property.

[5] It is well established that the whole of the community property shall be administered for the purpose of collecting the community assets and paying the community debts. In re Schoenfeld's Estate, 56 Wn.2d 197, 351 P.2d 935 (1960); Stanton v. Everett Trust Sav. Bank, 145 Wn. 165, 259 P. 10 (1927); Ryan v. Fergusson, 3 Wn. 356, 28 P. 910 (1891). [6] The question whether, after exhaustion of the community property, the defendant's separate property can be reached in a case such as this, is not before us. The primary liability, if any, is that of the community, which owned the property, and that liability can be established only by filing a claim in the estate of the deceased husband and following the procedure set forth in RCW 11.40.010 et seq. The only statute of limitations applicable to claims against the estates of decedents is that which is prescribed in that statute, and the community property is a part of the deceased husband's estate.

It is well established that the whole of the community property shall be administered for the purpose of collecting the community assets and paying the community debts. Ryan v. Fergusson, 3 Wn. 356, 28 P. 910; Stanton v. Everett Trust Sav. Bank, 145 Wn. 165, 259 P. 10. RCW 11.04.020 and .030 provide for the distribution of personal property subject to the debts of the decedent.