Search

Answer:  Yes. This is known as the “statute of limitations,” and it applies to virtually all claims. The reason is because there needs to be a cut-off date for claims. Otherwise, the courts could be flooded with litigants seeking recovery for stale cases which could be difficult to defend due to the lack of witnesses, loss/destruction of evidence, and poor memory. The concepts applies not only to the landlord and tenant claims against each other, but personal injury cases, business disputes, property damages, etc.

The statute, ORS 12.125 is deceptively simple: “An action arising under a rental agreement or ORS chapter 90 shall be commenced within one year.” It is a two-way street; landlords have one year to recover past due rent, and tenants have one year to bring claims against their landlords.

However, there are several exceptions:

• For example, some claims are “continuing,” so just because there was a tenant habitability violation at the commencement of the tenancy, in say, May 15, 2023, does not mean the tenant has no claim today for the same violation. If it continued to today only means that the tenant’s damage claim can go back 12 months; there can be no recovery before then. But if the claim is a single isolated event, say the landlord unlawfully entered the tenant’s premises on May 15, 2023, the claim would have lapsed on May 15, 2024. (Assuming the tenant knew, or reasonably should have known, of the intrusion.)
• The party bringing the claim must have known that the claim arose (using the “reasonable person standard”) before the applicable statute will commence running. If for example, the tenant was injured from contaminated well water in 2023, but didn’t learn of it until today (after the well had been repaired), the one-year statute might not commence running until the tenant knew or should have known of the contamination. (Note, this example does not address the general 2-year statute of limitations for personal injury. So even if the 1-year statute under the rental agreement or Chapter 90 did expire, the 2-year statute would still apply and preserve the injury claim.)
• Lastly, Oregon has certain “tolling” statutes which suspend the running of the applicable period of limitations if the aggrieved party is under some legal disability, such as incompetence, or the potential defendant conceals themselves.

Conclusion. Fortunately, the above exceptions normally don’t come into play when we’re talking about Oregon’s landlord-tenant laws. This is because most cases involving residential tenants relate to recovery of unpaid rent, which usually means the landlord would have already evicted the tenant long before allowing nonpayment to continue for 12 months. If not, landlords should – through legal counsel – secure a written agreement that the tenant consents to suspending (i.e. “tolling”) the one-year period.[1] Conversely, landlords have the satisfaction of knowing that despite a tenant’s frequent threats to file a lawsuit for some perceived violation, once the actionable event continues past one year, it has likely lapsed.

The take-away is the statutes of limitation issues under the Oregon landlord-tenant law can become confusing based upon when they commence and end. Always check with your legal counsel when an issue arises

[1] Caveat: Landlords must be careful about entering into written agreements with tenants addressing legal issues such as the waiver of a claim, without making sure the tenant will have the document reviewed by their own legal counsel before signing.

This is the fifth in a series of articles on disaster preparedness and how to safeguard your community, save lives and minimize damage.

In addition to the plan you are developing for your manufactured home community, you should encourage each resident family to have its own disaster plan in place.  

Residents should know what types of disaster could occur, and what they can do about each one.  A community newsletter is a good way to educate residents, and so are community meetings.

Residents should also know how they will be notified of a potential disaster.  Does the community have a warning system, such as a siren, and what does each signal mean?  

If someone in the family is responsible for helping to notify others in the community, phone numbers or addresses should be posted near the phone or in a place that can be easily reached.

It’s a good idea for all members of a family to discuss and develop these plans together.  The plans should include:

• Escape routes in the home, if doors are blocked
• Where to go in case of an immediate emergency, such as a community shelter
• Where to go in case of an evacuation
• A map of the evacuation route
• A list of phone numbers that would be needed in a disaster  (This would include doctors, relatives and insurance agents)
• A contact person outside of the area for all family members to call to report on their safety and whereabouts
• A place to meet if the family is separated

In addition, each member of the family should be assigned a job to do to get ready for an emergency.  For example:

• Set up, maintain and move emergency supplies
• Stow breakable items
• Secure outside items, such as awnings, grills or patio furniture
• Turn off utilities (electricity, water, natural or LP gas)
• Collect pets 
• Collect valuable items, if time allows (credit cards, insurance papers, drivers licenses, photos)

Note: Different steps should be taken to secure the home, depending on what type of disaster is being planned for.

Every member of the family should be familiar with the plan, and should participate in planned community practices or drills. Children should know where to go and what to do in case of an emergency, and should practice with their parents several times each year.  They should also memorize contact names and phone numbers in case separated from their parents.

In a community disaster, families may need to be able to survive on their own for several days.  This means each household should have its own water, food, clothing, a first aid kit and other emergency supplies ready to go at all times.  A list of the basics each family should have is provided on the opposite page.  It has been adapted from a list developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Family Emergency Supplies List

FEMA recommends that families use backpacks or duffel bags to store their emergency supplies and to move them, if necessary. They should contain items from the list below.

Families should keep their emergency supplies in a cool, dry place.  Boxed foods should be stored in closed containers.  The food and medical supplies should be dated and replaced with new supplies as needed.  If you are storing water over a long period of time, treat each container with a water purification element before storing it.  Keep water in a cool, dark place in tightly closed, unbreakable containers.

If someone in your family has a disability or specific medical problem that creates special needs, be sure that the necessary items are included in the emergency supplies.  If someone in the family is dependent on electric powered respirators or other medical equipment, find out what kinds of special assistance are available in the community.  If a family has no one who is capable of driving in an evacuation, make sure that a neighbor or someone else nearby will provide transportation.

Water, Food and Utensils

• Water (1 gallon per person per day) in non-breakable containers
• Ice and cooler chest
• Water purification materials: tablets, tincture of iodine or household bleach, with instructions on how they are used
• Food: high-nutrition and ready to eat items like canned tuna, peanut butter, granola bars
• Non-electric can opener
• Special foods, such as baby food, if needed
• Pet food, if needed
• Plastic utensils and cups

Communications, Lighting and Safety

• Battery-powered radio and extra batteries
• Cellular phone or citizens band radio
• NOAA weather-alert radio
• Fire extinguisher
• Flashlights and extra batteries
• Work gloves
• Propane gas stove

Clothing and Bedding

• One complete change of clothing for each person, appropriate for weather conditions
• Sturdy shoes
• Outer-wear appropriate for weather conditions
• Extra underwear and socks
• Sleeping bag or two blankets for each person
• Pillows

Personal Items

• Contact lens solution
• Dentures
• Deodorant
• Family Medications
• Insect repellent
• Sanitary napkins or tampons
• Sewing kit
• Shampoo, comb, hair brush
• Shaving kit
• Soap, toothbrushes, and toothpaste
• Special children’s needs: toys, blanket, pacifier, diapers
• Washcloth and towel

First Aid Kit

• Adhesive tape and bandages
• Antibiotic and anti-itch ointments
• Antiseptic solution
• Aspirin or substitute
• Diarrhea medication
• First aid handbook
• Petroleum jelly
• Prescription and non-prescription medications used by family
• Scissors and tweezers
• Sterile bandages

Papers and Valuables

(if not kept in a safety deposit box)

• Birth certificates
• Credit cards and cash
• Deeds and mortgages
• Drivers licenses
• Insurance policies
• Inventory of household goods (photos preferred)
• List of emergency phone numbers
• Photos that can’t be replaced
• Savings and checking account records
• Small valuables: watches, jewelry, cameras, electronics
• Stocks and bonds
• Wills

Answer:  This situation is not directly addressed in the Oregon manufactured housing laws. First, some general observations: The manufactured housing side of the landlord-tenant law regards the “space” as the “premises.”  For example, a resident in an apartment may not, without landlord permission, intentionally make major structural changes to the interior of the premises. However, most apartments have rules against this, or it is included in the rental agreement. Your space agreement or rules may have similar prohibitions regarding major changes to the space.

In this case, however, you permitted the work to commence.  It is unclear whether you had reviewed any plans, before the work started.  You should have made this a condition of building the carport in the first place.  What about permits?  It is unclear whether they are required in your jurisdiction, but it is something you should always make sure is complied with.  

I am unclear what you mean when you say that other such structures are “free standing and permanent.”  If they are permanent, in the sense of being permanently affixed to the space, then presumably, you are treating these as structures that would remain if the home were sold and removed.  However, your independent conclusion that a structure is “permanent” and therefor stays with the space is really not the complete issue; what does the resident believe? It was his money that presumably paid for the work, and he may have some say in whether he intended it to be a part of the home, and movable if the time came.  

While your opinion is important, so is that of your resident.  For this reason, I suggest that before doing this again, you might consider addressing it in the community rules.  Some of the things that should be covered are the following:

· Code compliance

· Management pre-approval of completed drawings

· Time to complete work

· Your right to post a notice of non-responsibility for liens if the resident hires a contractor

· Method of affixing to the ground

· Safety of final structure and perhaps inspector sign-off

· Who owns the structure

· Can it be removed upon sale and removal of the home (I suggest “yes” so long as the space is returned to its original condition and all holes are safely and completed filled, etc.)

· Duty to keep the carport in good and safe condition – remember if it is a part of the space, absent agreement with the resident, it would be your duty, since you own the park.

In this particular case, I suggest that if you have not pre-addressed these issues with your resident, he may believe this is his structure to do with as he sees fit.  I really can’t disagree, since you permitted the project and from your question, it appears no ground rules were established regarding ownership in the event the home was moved. However, if you permit the carport structure to be removed, you should insist that the space be returned to its original pre-construction condition. That’s about the best you can do with this situation, although establishing rules – or at least agreed-upon terms – before construction commences again, is a good idea.

Editor's Note:  This article appeared in the "Oregonian" earlier this week.  Although the article's focus is Seattle and Portland and apartment rent this debate on rent will likely generate several rent control bills in the 2017 Oregon Legislature that will likely impact manufactured home communities.  MHCO continues to monitor the political situation and educate Oregon Legislators.  However, articles like this make it certain that urban legislators will seek some form of rent control.

A Seattle city councilmember has proposed severely curtailing the amount of cash new renters need to plunk down to move in, The Seattle Times reports.

The bold move is sure to hit on a hot-button issue for renters in the Emerald City - as well as up and down the West Coast, where rents have continued to rapidly climb in recent years.

Over the past year, Seattle, Portland and San Francisco have led the nation in greatest percentage growth. Seattle's year-to-year rents increased 9.7 percent, which was four times the national rate. Portland ranked second at 9 percent and San Francisco at 7.4 percent, according to Zillow.com. Denver was fourth at 5.9 percent.

In Seattle, the average rent in June was a scorching $2,031 per month, according to Zillow.com. In Portland, it was lower, but still a sizzling $1,764 per month.

Think that's high? Keep in mind that in San Francisco, rents last month averaged nearly $3,400 per month.

Take a second for all of that to sink in. And now, back to Seattle, where City Councilmember Kshama Sawant has proposed limiting move-in fees -- including a security deposit and any nonrefundable, one-time payments -- to no more than the cost of one month's rent.

Sawant's proposal, made last week, also would require landlords to allow renters to pay their move-in fees in installments rather than immediately and in full. Landlords asking for last month's rent up front would also likewise be required to accept that sum in installments.

Councilmembers Lisa Herbold and Mike O'Brien will support Sawant's proposed ordinance, they said. But Washington's Rental Housing Association, a trade group for landlords, will not.

In Oregon, state lawmakers haven't legislated any restrictions on the amount of money renters have to come up with in order to move in, according to the rental law tracking site Landlordology.

But Portland leaders have talked about other ways to help out renters.

In 2015, Portland began requiring that owners of rental properties give tenants 90 days of written notice before raising their rents by 5 percent or more, or when terminating a lease without cause.

But hitting the problem head-on - that is, putting a cap on rents - hasn't been an option in Oregon. Oregon forbids cities and counties from enacting rent control laws. But changing state law has been talked about - as recently as a 2015 town hall discussion in Portland.

-- Aimee Green and The Associated Press

Answer: Both approaches are incorrect, as they do not comply with 90.610and 90.155for proper rule changes. This is exceeding risky, since, in my opinion, it creates the potential tenant argument that not being effectively enacted means the new rule is not enforceable. Any legal action to enforce a violation of an improperly enacted rule would be a nullity.

Below is the correct procedure in adopting new rules. It should not be varied from or ignored without first discussing with legal counsel:

• The landlord may propose changes in rules or regulations, including changes that make a substantial modification of the landlord's bargain with a tenant.
• It should be by written notice and served as described in 90.155.
• Unless tenants of at least 51 percent of the "eligible spaces"[1]in the community object in writing within 30 days of the date the rule change notice was served, the change shall become effective for all tenants of those eligible spaces on a date not less than 60 days after the date that the notice was properly served by the landlord.
  • One tenant of record per eligible space may object to the rule or regulation change through either: (i) A signed and dated written communication to the landlord; or (ii)A petition format that is signed and dated by tenants of eligible spaces and that includes a copy of the proposed rule or regulation and a copy of the notice.

• If a tenant of an eligible space signs botha written communication to the landlord and a petition, or signs more than one written communication or petition, only the latest signature of the tenant may be counted.
• Aproxy may be used only if a tenant has a disability that prevents them from objecting to the rule or regulation change in writing.
  • The landlord's notice of a proposed change in rules or regulations must be given or served as provided in 90.155and must include: (i) Language of the existing rule or regulation and the language that would be added or deleted by the proposed rule or regulation change; and (ii) A statement substantially in the following form, with all blank spaces in the notice to be filled in by the landlord:

______________________________________________________________________________

(MHCO FORM 60) NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE

OR REGULATION CHANGE

The landlord intends to change a rule or regulation in this facility.

The change will go into effect unless tenants of at least 51 percent of the eligible spaces object in writing within 30 days. Any objection must be signed and dated by a tenant of an eligible space.

The number of eligible spaces as of the date of this notice is:_____. Those eligible spaces are (space or street identification):___________________________.

The last day for a tenant of an eligible space to deliver a written objection to the landlord is _________ (landlord fill in date).

Unless tenants in at least 51 percent of the eligible spaces object, the proposed rule or regulation will go into effect on _________.

The parties may attempt to resolve disagreements regarding the proposed rule or regulation change by using the facility's informal dispute resolution process.

______________________________________________________________________________

• A good faith mistake by the landlord in completing those portions of the notice relating to the number of eligible spaces that have tenants entitled to vote or relating to space or street identification numbers does not invalidate the notice or the proposed rule or regulation change.
• After the effective date of the rule or regulation change (i.e. "a date not less than 60 days after the date that the notice was served by the landlord"), when a tenant continues to engage in an activity affected by the new rule or regulation to which the landlord objects, the landlord may give the tenant a notice of termination of the tenancy pursuant to ORS 90.630.
  • The notice shall include a statement that the tenant may request a resolution through the facility's informal dispute resolution process by giving the landlord a written request within seven (7) days from the date the notice was served.
  • If the tenant requests an informal dispute resolution, the landlord may not file an action for possession (i.e. eviction action) until 30 days after the date of the tenant's request for informal dispute resolution or the date the informal dispute resolution is complete, whichever occurs first.
• NOTE: Informal dispute resolution does not apply to disputes relating to:
  • Facility closure;
  • Facility sale; or
  • Rent, including but not limited to amount, increase and nonpayment.
• NOTE: Requiring a landlord to provide a Statement of Policy, do not create a basis for a tenant to demand informal dispute resolution of a rent increase.

[1]An "eligible space" means each space in the community as long as: (a) It is rented to a tenant and the tenancy is subject to ORS 90.505 to 90.850 (the manufactured housing section of the landlord-tenant law); and (b) The tenant who occupies the space has not: (i) Previously agreed to a rental agreement that already includes the proposed rule or regulation change; or (ii) Become subject to the proposed rule or regulation change as a result of a change in rules or regulations previously adopted under ORS 90.610.

MHCO Note: At the time of this printing, the Federal Trade Commission still has the effective date for enforcement of the Red Flags Rule as December 31, 2010. Exemptions for specific industries have been granted as late as the first week of December 2010. MHCO and MHI are conducting research on this topic and will be providing additional information as it becomes available. The Federal Trade Commission link is http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/redflagsrule/index.shtml and contains a lot of information that should be of interest to community owners and manufactured home community retailers. If you are subject to the new rule there is a template developed by the FTC for businesses at low risk for identity theft at this site. While we are still looking into this and monitoring developments in the Congress, it is likely that if a community owner is not billing for utilities, is not providing loans for residents purchasing homes, and is not acting as a retailer selling homes, they are not probably covered by the Red Flags Rule.

The "Red Flags" Rule: What You Need to Know

As of June 1, 2010 the Federal Trade Commission has begun enforcement of the 'Red Flags' rule which mandates creditors and financial institutions to implement identity theft prevention programs. It's important to spend some time discussing the rule, including what it is and what it means for you

The "Red Flags" Rule - In Plain English

The full title is this: "Identity Theft Red Flags and Address Discrepancies under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003" (FACT). It amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The rule was written specifically for companies making loans, such as banks and commercial lending institutions, but a portion of it extends to rental property owners and managers since both rely on consumer reports (e.g. credit) that (1) ask for sensitive information, such as social security numbers, and (2) could turn up address discrepancies. The philosophy behind this rule is simple: sensitive information must be kept secure to prevent identity theft, and a discrepancy in address could indicate fraud.

The rule requires that "reasonable" policies be in place to prevent identity theft and to verify a person's identity when an address discrepancy is reported. In the case of address discrepancy, if the property manager can't work out the discrepancy, the rule says he/she is not to rent to this individual.

What the Red Flags Rule Means for Rental Owners & Property Managers

While the rule has caused some confusion, compliance is straightforward. More than likely, you're probably already in compliance since the only thing that rental owners or property managers have to show is that they have a "reasonable" process in place for preventing identity theft and for checking IDs, verifying IDs, and following up/asking about any discrepancies.

For example, how do you destroy electronic and paper records that contain sensitive information? Or how about this: if someone gives one address on his or her rental application, but the license lists another address, what's your policy for handling this situation? As long as you have reasonable policies in place, you're in compliance.

Do I need to create a special report if I suspect fraud?

The other commonly asked question about the Red Flags rule (beyond "how do I comply") is this: do we need to report suspected fraud? The answer - for better or worse - is no. If you believe someone is trying to perpetrate a fraud, there's no requirement beyond not renting to this individual.

Still Unsure About the Red Flags Rule? Contact Your Screening Partner

Laws, rules, and amendments result in legitimate questions and concerns, so we understand people's trepidation regarding the Red Flags rule. While it's true that you're likely already in compliance, it can't hurt to contact your screening partner and ask to review with them your policies and systems.

For full details, visit the FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov/redflagsrule

The information in this article should not be construed as legal advice. Always consult an attorney for questions regarding legal matters and compliance.

ScreeningWorks is a service of RentGrow, Inc. the resident screening experts (www.ScreeningWorks.com).

For more information please contact info@screeningworks.com or 888-401-7999.

Look for more information on this issue in future issues of MHCO's "Community Update". 

Question: A home was purchased by a local dealer from a resident who had not paid rent for several months. The dealer then sold the home to another person who applied for tenancy and passed the screening criteria. The landlord wants the past due rent ($900) paid before permitting applicant to move into the home. Can the landlord go after the dealer to pay the past due rent? Can the landlord keep the applicant from moving in until the $900 is paid? Should the landlord have given some notice to the existing tenant, the dealer, and/or the prospective tenant, regarding how the unpaid rent should be handled? What about other expenses the tenant who sold the home ran up, such as utilities, late fees, maintenance clean up expenses, etc.? What do you suggest as far as notices to the dealer stating the amount of money owed? The dealer is not the lien holder.

Answer: Landlords should become intimately familiar with ORS 90.680, and then make sure their rules and rental agreements conform to what is allowed. Set forth below is a summary of those portions of the statute that address your questions:

o If the prospective purchaser of a manufactured dwelling or floating home desires to leave the dwelling or home on the rented space and become a tenant, the landlord may require the following:

o That a tenant give not more than 10 days' notice in writing prior to the sale of the dwelling or home on a rented space;

o That prior to the sale, the prospective purchaser submit to the landlord a complete and accurate written application for occupancy of the dwelling or home as a tenant after the sale is finalized;

o That a prospective purchaser may not occupy the dwelling or home until after the prospective purchaser is accepted by the landlord as a tenant;

o That a tenant give notice to any lienholder, prospective purchaser or person licensed to sell dwellings or homes of the requirements of the resale requirements [Emphasis mine - PCQ];

o If the sale is not by a lienholder, that the prospective purchaser pay in full all rents, fees, deposits or charges owed by the tenant prior to the landlord's acceptance of the prospective purchaser as a tenant [Emphasis mine];

o If the landlord's rules and/or rental agreement requires prospective purchasers to submit an application for occupancy as a tenant, at the time that the landlord gives the prospective purchaser an application the landlord shall also give the prospective purchaser copies of the statement of policy, the rental agreement and the facility rules and regulations, including any conditions imposed on a subsequent sale ;

o The following conditions apply if a landlord receives an application for tenancy from a prospective purchaser:

o The landlord shall accept or reject the prospective purchaser's application within seven days following the day the landlord receives a complete and accurate written application ;

o An application is not complete until the prospective purchaser pays any required applicant screening charge and provides the landlord with all information and documentation, including any financial data and references, required by the landlord;

o The landlord may not unreasonably reject a prospective purchaser as a tenant. Reasonable cause for rejection includes, but is not limited to:

o Failure of the prospective purchaser to meet the landlord's conditions for approval;

o Failure of the prospective purchaser's references to respond to the landlord's timely request for verification within the time allowed for acceptance or rejection;

o In most cases, the landlord must furnish to the seller and purchaser a written statement of the reasons for any rejection ;

o The landlord may give the tenant selling the home a notice to repair the home [e.g. for damage or deterioration] under ORS 90.632. The landlord may also give any prospective purchaser a copy of that notice.

o The landlord may require as a condition of tenancy that a prospective purchaser who desires to leave the dwelling or home on the rented space and become a tenant must comply with the repair notice within the allowed period under ORS 90.632.

o If the tenancy has been terminated for failure to timely complete the repairs under ORS 90.632, a prospective purchaser does not have a right to leave the dwelling or home on the rented space and become a tenant.

Obviously, the statute was drafted with tenant/purchasers in mind. However, as long as the home remains on the space, the landlord has complete control over the situation. In your case, I suspect the delinquent tenant made no effort to notify the landlord of his planned sale to the dealer. However, that does not prevent him from imposing these requirements on the dealer if he wants to put a tenant in the park.

Going forward, it might be advisable for all landlords who have faced this situation before, to prepare a summary of requirements to give dealers when they purchase homes from tenants already sited in the park. They may want to expressly address this in their rules, so tenants cannot say they didn't know. The written summary to dealers should clearly state that if a departing tenant owes monies to the landlord, repayment will be required before occupancy of the home will be permitted by a new resident. [A more difficult question that is not addressed by the statute, ORS 90.680, is whether the landlord may prevent the dealer from removing the home without paying the past due sums. I suspect the answer may be Yes" a landlord may do so

One decision can make a significant difference in monthly payments: whether to finance the mobile home with a personal property loan or a mortgage.

Personal property loans, known as chattel loans, have much higher interest rates than mortgages. To some owners of manufactured homes, refinancing chattel loans into mortgages could reduce monthly housing expenses.

Get the latest refinance rates

Refinancing a mobile home

To qualify for refinancing as a mortgage:

• The home must be on a permanent foundation that meets standards set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• The manufactured home must be titled as real estate rather than as personal property.
• The homeowner has to own the land that the manufactured home is on. An important exception to this rule is explained below.

Big difference in interest rates

In 2012, about 68 percent of all manufactured-housing purchase loans were considered higher-priced mortgage loans, and many of them were chattel loans, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Interest rates on chattel loans range from 7 percent to 12.75 percent, says Ken Rishel, founder of Rishel Consulting Group in Chicago. The loans are usually for 15 or 20 years.

In contrast, the average rate for a 30-year fixed-rate loan has been well below 5 percent for all of 2014.

Rishel, whose company makes chattel loans of at least $5,000, says the interest rates are risk-based, and chattel loans are often the only choice for borrowers with poor credit. Chattel loans are the main option for owners whose mobile homes are not permanent foundations.

Converting to a new title

Some states have eased the process of converting a personal property title into a real estate title, making refinancing possible, says Marc J. Lifset, an attorney with McGlinchey Stafford in Albany, New York.

Lifset helped financial institutions lobby for the approval of that legislation in Alaska, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Tennessee and Virginia.

"The legislation provides a clear definition of when the home is real estate and when it is not," he says. "It makes the process more certain. In many states, the definition was murky."

Getting a real estate title

A real estate attorney or title company can help with a title conversion as a first step to refinance. Owners of manufactured homes need to provide:

• A certificate of title to the home or a copy of the manufactured certificate of origin.
• The deed to the land where the home with the permanent foundation is located.

Once the owner has the real estate title in hand, the next step is to find lenders that provide mortgages on manufactured homes. The rest of the process is similar to closing a mortgage on any residential property.

Borrowing on leased land

Under some circumstances, owners of manufactured homes leasing a lot at a mobile home community can get mortgages -- even if they don't own the land beneath their feet.

The Federal Housing Administration offers a program known as Title I, designed for owners whose mobile homes are on a permanent foundation but are within a manufactured housing community.

Among the requirements for a Title 1 mortgage:

• The mobile home must be the borrower's primary residence.
• The home has to be on a rental site in a manufactured home park that conforms to FHA guidelines.
• The lease agreement must meet FHA standards.

It's not easy to find mobile home communities that meet the FHA's strict guidelines, says Rishel, whose company makes chattel loans in land-lease communities. "Not many landlords participate on the Title I program."

Few lenders offer Title I mortgages. One is 21st Mortgage, which is owned by Clayton Homes, one of the nation's largest manufacturers of mobile homes.

Costs of switching title

When a mobile home is titled as personal property, the owner pays personal property taxes. When it's titled as real estate, the owner pays real estate taxes. In many states, property taxes tend to be higher.

"The consumer has to do the math on how much they are going to save by lower interest rates, compared to how much more taxes they may be paying and what the closing costs are going to be" in a refinancing, Lifset says.

Another potential downside: If the owner has to build a permanent foundation to refinance a chattel loan, that expense has to be taken into account. Building a new foundation could cost $10,000 to $15,000, Rishel says.

"Refinancing is a valuable thing but for a limited number of people who live in manufactured homes," he says.

MHCO would like to thank Ken Rishel for providing this article:

Answer:   Does the former tenant have issues other than his lack of fiscal responsibility?  You could prevent him from being a temporary occupancy based upon prior conduct, etc., but not regarding his failure to pay rent, since “in theory” a temporary occupant is not one who is sharing rent, etc. The statute (ORS 90.275) does not permit you to vet a person’s financial/employment status if they want to be a temporary occupant.  If the guy has other negative issues, you can decline to put him on a temporary occupancy agreement if they are substantial and material.

The following is a summary of a recent conversation I had with the Fair Housing Council of Oregon on the issue of whether landlords can put “caregivers” on Temporary Occupancy Agreements, rather than putting them on a Rental Agreement (or not putting them on any written agreement - which leaves in doubt their legal status if the Landlord wants them removed from the Community).

1. If the assistance provider doesn’t qualify based on the background check[1] then you don’t have to accept them into the Community;
2. If they violate rules of the community when they are already in the Community you can require they leave. (Of course if they are not on an Occupancy Agreement, this could mean removing the tenant if the caregiver refuses to leave, and the tenant doesn’t force them to do so);

• You can pre-qualify the current tenant as to their need for a care provider, i.e. require a letter or similar proof from a doctor or someone, saying the tenant needs someone 24/7;
• If they can’t provide that proof, then you don’t have to allow them into the Community as a care provider (although I can’t imagine it would be very hard to obtain such proof);
• You have to give the current tenant a choice (assuming the person qualifies under the background check), i.e. they can be on an Occupancy Agreement or go onto a Rental Agreement.  You can’t automatically say, “OK, you must go on an Occupancy Agreement.”
• It is believed that if the tenant understands the risk of allowing the caregiver to be a tenant (i.e. if the caregiver is disruptive, the current tenant may have to leave also), that they will voluntarily opt to put the person on the Occupancy Agreement. (Note: This doesn’t address the problem where the person doesn’t financially qualify to be on the Rental Agreement, but I suspect FHCO would say it’s a “reasonable accommodation” by the landlord to waive that financial requirement.)  This approach may be slightly unrealistic in those cases in which the tenant wants the caregiver there, and defers to what the caregiver says.

Your alternatives seem to be the following:

• If the current tenant wants them to be a care provider, can he/she establish its legitimacy?  If not, you can say no.
• If the current tenant wants them as a temporary occupant, and they have been a problem in the park you can say no; I believe this is so, even though they try to go the care provider route.
• If the current tenant wants them as a “tenant” you can say no because they do not have the financial capacity to pay rent (remember, you couldn’t say that if they were to be a temporary occupant).
• If you do agree to make them a temporary occupant, have everyone sign the Temporary Occupancy Agreement and put him on a 3 or 6 month term, to see how it goes.  You are under no obligation to renew – but if they are serving as a care provider on a Temporary Occupancy Agreement, you’d probably have difficulty not renewing unless there was a specific problem. (But if there was a specific problem, you likely would have already removed them.  Getting temporary occupants must be “for cause” e.g. a rules violation, but there is no 30-day right to cure.)

[1] Remember, you cannot require financial capacity if they are to be a temporary occupant, but you can if they are to be a tenant.

The vast majority of fair housing cases are for intentional discrimination (or what’s known as “disparate treatment”—that is, purposely treating people differently because of their race, color, or other protected characteristics. But you could face a fair housing claim even when there’s no intent to discriminate: In what’s known as “disparate impact” claims, communities may be held liable for policies or practices that appear to be neutral, but have an unjustified discriminatory effect on minorities or others protected under fair housing law.

Example: In November 2019, the owners and operators of a 900-unit New York apartment complex agreed to pay $1.1 million to settle a race discrimination case alleging that the community enforced a policy prohibiting anyone with a criminal record from living there. The complaint alleged that the policy unlawfully discriminated because it disproportionately barred African Americans and Latinos from housing without considering each potential resident’s individual history and circumstances. The community denied the allegations but agreed to settle the case.

Example: In August 2019, a Virginia community agreed to settle allegations that its criminal background screening policy discriminated against people on the basis of race. The complaint was based on the results of a fair housing testing conducted by advocacy groups to assess the barriers individuals with criminal histories face when seeking housing. Allegedly, the testing showed that testers posing as prospects were told that their applications would be automatically rejected because of their felony convictions. The community denied the allegations but agreed to the settlementrequiring payment of damages and attorney’s fees.

DEEP DIVE:

HUD Guidance on Criminal Background Checks

In 2016, HUD issued guidance on how federal fair housing law applies to the use of criminal records in both conventional and government-assisted housing communities. HUD cited statistics showing that African Americans and Hispanics are arrested, convicted, and incarcerated at disproportionately higher rates than whites with respect to their share of the general population. The guidelines don’t prevent communities from screening applicants based on their criminal history, but you could face a fair housing complaint if your criminal screening policy, without justification, has a disparate impact—or discriminatory effect—on minority applicants.

If you haven’t updated your policy for a while, there are some steps you should take ASAP to reduce the risk of fair housing trouble. If, for example, your policy still considers arrest records in criminal background screenings, you should make some changes immediately. HUD’s new guidelines flatly say that excluding someone based on arrest records is likely to have a discriminatory effect based on race and national origin.

Check whether your policy still lists “all felonies” or long-ago felonies as reasons not to rent to someone. If so, you may be headed for trouble because the guidelines call into question the lawfulness of excluding people based on criminal convictions without considering what the conviction was for or how long ago it occurred.

Taking it a step further, check whether your policy allows applicants to explain the background of a felony conviction. The HUD guidelines say that communities should offer applicants with criminal records an opportunity to explain the circumstances and what’s happened since then—something akin to the “interactive” process for disability-related reasonable accommodation requests.