# FMH's (mobile homes) and additions



## fatboy

My least favorite subject.

So, I have many mobile home parks in my jurisdiction, and probably like most of the inspectors/code officials here, I avoid going through them at all costs. The amount of illegal construction that goes on over weekends and holidays would be enough to keep another 8 of my staff busy chasing them down for permits. I figure that is the park managers job, they are there 24/7, or have staff that is.

So, I now have a park tenant that has a beef with a neighbor over an addition that is being done. I had my inspector go to the park manager and tell him to do his job, and settle the difference. Doesn't happen, tenant wants me to do something about it.

I am more than a little reluctant to do anything, as when I drove though there this morning, out of around 70-80 spaces/FMH's, there were maybe 10 spaces/FMH's that *DID NOT* have some form of illegal construction, done at some time. And even if I conquered this park, there ore 5-6 more within a half mile, and many more in the City.

So, how do you all handle it? Do you leave the parks alone? Do you go after them? After the tenants? The managers? The owners? What about all the other crap that has been done over the years?

Anybody have a silver bullet to put these things down?


----------



## JCraver

Are they State regulated/licensed there?  In IL the Dept. of Public Health licenses them, and does annual inspections.  I permit all the new work/additions/etc., but pawn everything I can off on the State.  The operators are more scared of IDPH yanking their license than they are of me.


----------



## Rick18071

We would never let them go here. Mobile homes are regulated by HUD not the I codes and does not allow additions. I would go after the land owner.


----------



## fatboy

JCraver said:


> Are they State regulated/licensed there?  In IL the Dept. of Public Health licenses them, and does annual inspections.  I permit all the new work/additions/etc., but pawn everything I can off on the State.  The operators are more scared of IDPH yanking their license than they are of me.



As Rick said in his reply, in the factory they are HUD, post 1976 (I think) so no problem. No State help here.



Rick18071 said:


> We would never let them go here. Mobile homes are regulated by HUD not the I codes and does not allow additions. I would go after the land owner.



And, that's the problem, folks know they can't do additions legally, so they just do them on the weekends. It would be impossible to keep up with them, here anyway. I'm thinking the land owner.........but to what extent? What is the solution? Start beating up on these folks, the ones in the homes, no matter whether it comes from me, or the land owner, and all he!! will break loose, picking on the poor people.


----------



## cda

Handle same as you do the rest of the city?

Handle complaint only basis??


----------



## steveray

Unfortunately, here, once "we" know about it, we would be judged negligent if we didn't do anything about it....Say they did some bootlegged wiring, had a fire and someone died, the Town would be liable and negligent as we knew about the dangerous situation and did nothing....Chasing violations is ugly, just make sure the City or Town has your back however you proceed...


----------



## CityKin

I am in the exact same situation as you Fatboy.  We finally decided that enough was enough and started writing violation letters on any _enclosed_ additions.  We will allow (or look the other way) decks and roofed patios, but the enclosed additions are unsafe and must be removed.  An enclosed addition means that you have more rooms to pass through to get outside and usually means the electric is over-extended, and may use space heaters etc...

In Ohio we have absolutely no support from the state agency that licenses them.  They are understaffed and never threaten pulling a license.  

We send the violation letters to both the park owner and to the trailer address.  Verbally, I warn the park owners about fire hazards and liability etc.

You can never get them to be 100% compliant, but if you focus on the big picture of "no enclosed additions" progress is possible.


----------



## Keystone

Your situation suckssssss, if you have direct knowledge and you completed a site visit you are obligated to act. Think of it this way, the warehouse fire!!!  I would feel confident in saying, even though I'm 3000K miles away from that area, an inspector had knowledge of the conditions.... maybe not the exact conditions but non the less he or she had been well aware.


----------



## Keystone

We only act if there's a written, signed and dated with your full name and current address on the complaint cause we will have a subpoena issued for the complainant if it ends up in court.   

Now during the process if we can bring resolve to the issue at hand without the courts the complainant remains anonymous to prevent the tit for tat.


----------



## CityKin

In a poorly managed trailer park, things can get out of control pretty quick.  To complicate matters, the tenants may be renters or they may own the trailer but pay rent to the land owner, and you have no way to find out their name or contact info.  Also we have communication problems with many of the trailer tenants because many of them don't speak English very well and need to bring their kids in to translate for them, and they will often build with used windows and doors etc. 

In our state, trailer parks are licensed by a state agency with very few employees.  There are many trailer park owners on the board of this agency, and it is like the fox guarding the hen-house.  But additions are totally our responsibility, and IMO they are not even allowed for multiple zoning and building code reasons.  Yes a small deck or front door stoop is expected, but full-fledged additions with windows are a big no-no.


----------



## Mark K

If you have no jurisdiction the failure of those that do does not make you responsible for stepping in.  In fact by acting without legal jurisdiction you could be taking on liability that you would not have if you did not exceed your authority.

In California the building official and inspectors have essentially no liability if they do not exceed their authority even if you fail to follow through on a problem.

Decks would be a building code issue as would added rooms attached to the mobile home.


----------



## mtlogcabin

If you site and can fine the landowner (park) and are successful then managements attitude will change and the word gets around through all the park owners?managers in you jurisdiction. I have learned if you start with the big fish and are successful the little fish will follow.


----------



## fatboy

Well, an update. Met with my attorney, and she agreed I could go after them disregarding the stop work order, without having to address the rest of the parks existing deficiencies. I will be going out and issuing a summons today for failing to obey a stop work order. I sent notice, gave them 30 days to deconstruct the illegal addition. Much hand wringing and whining from trailer occupant to City Manager, but they backed me. So, off we go to a hearing in a couple weeks.

Let you know how it goes.


----------



## steveray

Hope it works out!


----------



## linnrg

fatboy
With your new notice will you also be issuing any fines?  Can you describe your "penalty" clauses for stop work oreders.
what is up with a hearing?  I that something you are required to have?
Also what was constructed


----------



## fatboy

1) Yes, if compliance is achieved prior to hearing date, $25. If they go to hearing, minimum $100- max $600 if found liable, $1,000 if they don't show.
2) You either stop work and clear up the problem, or we move to the Notice of Violation.
3) It is our Administrative solution to our Municipal Court proceedings, saves time, fines are still levied. It is our final solution, unless they really go off, we then hit them with contempt, and move to Municipal Court.
4) Addition to attached to the home.


----------



## linnrg

thank you Fatboy for replying - we do not have a municipal court so there has been discussions about fine schedules, actions etc.  I do not issue lots of stop work orders (like you I could if I spent more time in mobile home parks!).  I have done some and even told equipment operators to shut it down immediately (a case involving riverfront excavation).  Just this year we went through the full blown demolition of a damaged property and the court process (State level court) to do that.  It was not fun and still have court work to try to recover costs.
my apologies to all for my poor typing as I have been having lots of issues with dead fingers due to carpal tunnel.


----------



## fatboy

What does your jurisdiction do with other infractions.........speeding, parking, etc? PM me if you want more details on our process.

Do the Carpel Tunnel surgery, had both mine done...........worth the pain and effort. Just to be able to sleep again............


----------



## fatboy

OK, tomorrow is the big day.........just go a call from the Admin Hearing Officer, wanted to have a reference that states you cannot have an addition attached to a MH. I had replied, it's just plain accepted engineering practice that you do not attach a permanent structure, to a non-permanent structure. She still wants a reference. So, I am looking at definitions for a manufactured home, and then going to R301.1.3.  Anyone have a more direct route, I don't think she will play with my route.

Ideas....... quickly?

I'm going to poke around a see if HUD has something.


----------



## Rick18071

Wouldn't zoning have more power in doing something rather than the building code department? In my state the property owner is the responsible party, so wouldn't you go after the trailer park owner since the violations are built on their property rather than the folks in the trailers?


----------



## fatboy

I am going after both the property owner, and the occupant. I'm going after failure to comply with a stop work order.


----------



## Pcinspector1

fatboy,

In regards to the MH park: Might want to do a code sweep, let them know your coming in the local paper or city newsletter. Write up every thing you see after the notice is out, send letters, give time to comply. It might cut down the violations. If, private property, check with your city attorney first.

Like steveray said, an electrical issue that causes a fire could bring a lot of attention especially if there's a fatality. I've seen a lot of bad MH electrical hook ups starting from the PED to the panel. I've seen a few melted Lincoln Cents behind fuses, and copper plumbing being used in place of the cartridge fuses.


----------



## my250r11

The State regulates MH here.

The last AHJ I work didn't mess with the parks. Additions, deck,etc. everywhere else were approved if completely self supporting structurally, used existing door opening and if electrical was added a separate panel from the pole was added.

In the AHJ i'm in now still really doesn't mess with any MH send them to the State. Few weeks back however got PD call while they were doing a welfare check found some serious elec. violations. Was very unsafe and in a MH park. Called the Electric company & they came out agree it was unsafe and pulled the meter til it gets fix.

The State does give us the power to abate any UNSAFE condition of ANY structure thru State Statue though.


----------



## fatboy

Well, I prevailed, I went with R403.1, on the premise that an addition itself would be fine, but after tying it to a FMH, which does not comply with R403.1, it would make the entire structure then non-compliant. I backed it up with a reference to AE504.1 (just for reference, we don't have it adopted), and a State of Colorado FMH Installation Manual that has a section that states the same thing. It worked, I was successful in my action against the occupant. She has 30 days to deconstruct, I did not pursue fines, on day 31, I can contract to have it abated, with the cost plus 20% levied against the park owner (property).

I will pursue active non-permitted work in the future, that is occurring under my watch, and leave the existing stock alone. In a 140 year old City of over 100,000 population, I would not have the resources to tackle the old work if I had ten more inspectors and five more admins........... too many mobile homes to count.


----------

