Jump to content

HUD definition of RV going to make it difficult to full time..


rgetsy

Recommended Posts

HUD and Mobile Home industry have ganged up against the RV industry. An RV is for temporary recreational use and not for permanent occupancy or primary residence.

 

Article link: https://federalregister.gov/a/2016-02387

or this: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/02/09/2016-02387/manufactured-home-procedural-and-enforcement-regulations-revision-of-exemption-for-recreational

 

 

Could get nasty...

 

I've had problems in the past from Census trying to locate our home (using Escapee park in Livingston) and had issues with Stock Brokers citing the Patriot Act (not having a stick home or permanent address)..

 

Could even negate our IRS 1st or 2nd home deduction since the RV isn't a home. Voting??

Full timers for 10 years Now Part Timers

2007 Phaeton (MBZ engine) will be pulling..

2005 Silverado Z71 will be carrying a ...

Victory Motorcycle (no longer)

172 Cessna (no longer owned)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're getting all worked up over nothing. This has to do with construction requirements, not voting, etc. RVs have always been defined as not designed for temporary/vacation use and so follow different codes.

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I've had problems in the past from Census trying to locate our home (using Escapee park in Livingston)

 

My understanding is that Census workers don't care where your residence is; all they are supposed to care about is the number of people in the dwelling they are canvassing on the date the census is taken. It's supposed to be a snapshot of the population at a particular time.

Sandie & Joel

2000 40' Beaver Patriot Thunder Princeton--425 HP/1550 ft-lbs CAT C-12
2014 Honda CR-V AWD EX-L with ReadyBrute tow bar/brake system
WiFiRanger Ambassador
Follow our adventures on Facebook at Weiss Travels

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true, Census workers have to verify where you live / domicile. Otherwise I could have multiple locations which would mess up the voting and distribution of fed money. I was called while they were looking at Google Maps trying to locate me at the Escapee Park. There (this is last Census so old) many threads on how to "help them find you" so your Census mattered for us. And as you state "number of people in your dwelling" and they can't canvass an empty RV lot.

Full timers for 10 years Now Part Timers

2007 Phaeton (MBZ engine) will be pulling..

2005 Silverado Z71 will be carrying a ...

Victory Motorcycle (no longer)

172 Cessna (no longer owned)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what does this have to do with the FR notice? All they are doing is trying to make sure that park models and 5th wheels, which might be more than 400 sq feet depending upon how measurements are done, are still classified as RVs. If you read the history of the background of the rule, the first ones were promulgated in 1974. RVs have been classified as not permanent residences since then. '74 was the start of the 'manufactured' housing versus 'mobile homes' ala "The Long Trailer".

 

One of the differences is: "A recreational vehicle is a vehicle, regardless of size, which is not designed to be used as a permanent dwelling, and in which the plumbing, heating, and electrical systems contained therein may be operated without connection to outside utilities and which are self- propelled or towed by a light duty vehicle.”

 

Problem is that now Park Models MUST be connected to utilities, but are still listed as RVs, so the current promulgation seeks to revise the definition:

 

After reviewing the MHCC's recommendation, HUD is accepting the recommendation with revision. Initially, HUD proposes to restructure the exemption by removing it from § 3282.8 and codifying it at § 3282.15. HUD is also proposing to incorporate ANSI's updated 2015 Recreational Park Trailer Standard, A119.5-15, which after review, HUD believes best reflects the current state of recreational vehicle construction. Finally, to ensure consumer awareness of the difference between manufactured housing and recreational vehicles and the construction standards used to build each, HUD is proposing to require that each ANSI A119.5-15 certified structure seeking an exemption include a notice to be prominently displayed in a temporary manner in the kitchen (i.e., countertop or exposed cabinet face) until the completion of the sale transaction that explains that the manufacturer certifies that the structure is a recreational vehicle designed only for recreational use, and not for use as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy. The notice shall further explain that the manufacturer certifies that the unit has been built in accordance with ANSI A119.5-15. This notice shall be placed prominently to ensure consumers are made plainly aware of the distinction between recreational vehicles that are not self-propelled and manufactured housing, reflecting the intent of the MHCC in its recommendation to draw a clear distinction between the two products.

 

Again, this is really about Park Models vs manufactured housing.

 

Barb

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link, Dutch. The important part of this is in the final paragraphs.

 

Under this proposed rule, the modern RV lifestyle cannot be regulated out of existence. Great news for anyone involved with it. But what else does this mean for RV owners specifically? From the consumer’s day-to-day perspective the proposed rule changes nothing. HUD sets standards and regulates what happens to manufactured housing.

This regulation makes it perfectly clear that RVs designed as RVs and built to modern RV standards are, in fact, RVs. The laws and regulations governing the use of RVs are set at the state and especially at the local municipal and county levels, not by HUD. So the new rule does not affect full-time recreational RVing in any way. At the same time, localities that set 6, 8, 10 or 12-month limits for an RV stay in a campground will continue to have those regulations.

Finally, although RVs have always been specifically designed for recreational purposes, some states and localities do nevertheless permit people to live in RVs as a permanent residence and will continue to do so. HUD’s proposed rule will not change that. Anyone who cares about RVing and the RV lifestyle should be rejoicing at the publication of this proposed rule and advocating for its adoption as proposed. It will keep our RVs rolling for the foreseeable future.

Good travelin !...............Kirk

Full-time 11+ years...... Now seasonal travelers.
Kirk & Pam's Great RV Adventure

            images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQqFswi_bvvojaMvanTWAI

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my reading this is not as simple as it seems. Lets take the case of a "true" RV being built by a custom manufacturer. Lets pick on Forks RV - who build high end custom 5th wheels that are suitable and intended for the fulltime lifestyle.

 

Most custom RVs utilize appliances and other fixtures not "certified" under RVIA regulations. Use of those residential fixtures - that ARE certified under other regulatory agencies for use in homes, ships or planes - precludes the builder from obtaining an RVIA certification (sticker) for the unit. Thus the unit does not meet the definition of an RV (it does not meet the "standards" mentioned in the regulation). It thus defaults to be a HUD regulated trailer.

 

Much off the progress in getting RVs to become more modern and "live-able" has been pushed by the custom or semi-custom manufacturers. Something as simple as use of a residential refrigerator could have been precluded by this type of regulation. RVIA standards are for the most part good, and necessary. But they are also very restrictive in parts. The custom manufactures - and even the semi-custom manufacturers like Augusta - OFTEN cannot adhere to them. These leading edge RV developers could be precluded from innovation under these regulations.

Jack & Danielle Mayer #60376 Lifetime Member
Living on the road since 2000

PLEASE no PM's. Email me. jackdanmayer AT gmail
2016 DRV Houston 44' 5er (we still have it)
2022 New Horizons 43' 5er
2016 Itasca 27N 28' motorhome 
2019 Volvo 860, D13 455/1850, 236" wb, I-Shift, battery-based APU
No truck at the moment - we use one of our demo units
2016 smart Passion, piggyback on the truck
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
See our website for info on New Horizons 5th wheels, HDTs as tow vehicles, communications on the road, and use of solar power
www.jackdanmayer.com
Principal in RVH Lifestyles. RVH-Lifestyles.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much off the progress in getting RVs to become more modern and "live-able" has been pushed by the custom or semi-custom manufacturers. Something as simple as use of a residential refrigerator could have been precluded by this type of regulation. RVIA standards are for the most part good, and necessary. But they are also very restrictive in parts. The custom manufactures - and even the semi-custom manufacturers like Augusta - OFTEN cannot adhere to them. These leading edge RV developers could be precluded from innovation under these regulations.

 

RVs are covered by NFPA 1192-15 and ANSI A119.5-09. I believe that's it for RVIA compliance.

 

I have a 2011 edition of NFPA 1192 and it looks like a set of minimum requirements. For example, if you have a propane-fueled fridge, there are venting requirements. I didn't find anything saying saying you could not have a residential fridge.

 

However, I don't have the latest version of NFPA 1192 or the ANSI standard.

 

What, specifically, in these standards precludes innovation?

SKP #79313 / Full-Timing / 2001 National RV Sea View / 2008 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon
www.rvSeniorMoments.com
DISH TV for RVs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were in an RV park during the 2010 Census. But, we chose to be counted as South Dakota residents so filled out and mailed in a form for that location. The enumerator who knocked on our door at the park accepted this answer since it is important that people not be counted twice. We were permitted to choose at which location we would be counted. We did NOT want to be counted as Californians with is where we physically were at that time.

 

Linda Sand

Blog: http://sandcastle.sandsys.org/

Former Rigs: Liesure Travel van, Winnebago View 24H, Winnebago Journey 34Y, Sportsmobile Sprinter conversion van

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

RVs are covered by NFPA 1192-15 and ANSI A119.5-09. I believe that's it for RVIA compliance.

 

I have a 2011 edition of NFPA 1192 and it looks like a set of minimum requirements. For example, if you have a propane-fueled fridge, there are venting requirements. I didn't find anything saying saying you could not have a residential fridge.

 

However, I don't have the latest version of NFPA 1192 or the ANSI standard.

 

What, specifically, in these standards precludes innovation?

 

I don't have the ANSI standard readily available either, but I do have online membership access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 1192. As far as I can see without a word by word comparison, there have been no substantial changes from the 2011 edition related to this discussion. It should be noted I think, that 1192 incorporates parts of NFPA 70, the NEC, by reference.

Dutch
2001 GBM Landau 34' Class A
F-53 Chassis, Triton V10, TST TPMS
2011 Toyota RAV4 4WD/Remco pump
ReadyBrute Elite tow bar/brake system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would having a residential refrigerator preclude being certified? RVIA is certifying all-electric motorhomes from various upscale manufacturers, what are the semi-custom/custom guys doing that is so revolutionary that they can't get certified?

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh. They like it in Elkhart:

http://www.elkharttruth.com/news/business/rv-industry/2016/02/13/HUD-sides-with-RV-industry-in-revising-RV-definition.html

 

Although this quote from an RVIA director is revealing:

 

“No one wants people living long term in RVs,” Wald said. “That is not good for the manufactured housing industry or the RV industry.”

 

The words "consumer" and "buyer" do not appear anywhere in the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

RVs are covered by NFPA 1192-15 and ANSI A119.5-09. I believe that's it for RVIA compliance.

 

I have a 2011 edition of NFPA 1192 and it looks like a set of minimum requirements. For example, if you have a propane-fueled fridge, there are venting requirements. I didn't find anything saying saying you could not have a residential fridge.

 

However, I don't have the latest version of NFPA 1192 or the ANSI standard.

 

What, specifically, in these standards precludes innovation?

Well, for example, use of any cooktop NOT approved by RVIA will cause failure during an RVIA inspection. That is the specific reason New Horizons stopped using Verona cooktops. Just as a minor example.

 

Of course, you do not have to have an RVIA compliant coach. Mine is not, and it does not have an RVIA sticker. But if that then makes it fall under HUD guidelines what is a manufacturer to do?

Jack & Danielle Mayer #60376 Lifetime Member
Living on the road since 2000

PLEASE no PM's. Email me. jackdanmayer AT gmail
2016 DRV Houston 44' 5er (we still have it)
2022 New Horizons 43' 5er
2016 Itasca 27N 28' motorhome 
2019 Volvo 860, D13 455/1850, 236" wb, I-Shift, battery-based APU
No truck at the moment - we use one of our demo units
2016 smart Passion, piggyback on the truck
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
See our website for info on New Horizons 5th wheels, HDTs as tow vehicles, communications on the road, and use of solar power
www.jackdanmayer.com
Principal in RVH Lifestyles. RVH-Lifestyles.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most custom RVs utilize appliances and other fixtures not "certified" under RVIA regulations. Use of those residential fixtures - that ARE certified under other regulatory agencies for use in homes, ships or planes - precludes the builder from obtaining an RVIA certification (sticker) for the unit. Thus the unit does not meet the definition of an RV (it does not meet the "standards" mentioned in the regulation). It thus defaults to be a HUD regulated trailer.

Remember what RVIA stands for. It is the organization of RV manufacturers and as such it's purpose is mostly to protect their own members. They set standards in an effort to keep government regulations out and have had great success in delaying the implementation of federal highway safety standards to the RV industry. They self regulate in an effort to prevent government entry into their industry and while I have empathy for that practice, they do not always have the best interest of the customers in mind and they tend to protect their members from competition from nonmember companies. All of us form groups mostly to protect ourselves and the RV builders are no different. Protectionism can sometimes inhibit innovation.

Good travelin !...............Kirk

Full-time 11+ years...... Now seasonal travelers.
Kirk & Pam's Great RV Adventure

            images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQqFswi_bvvojaMvanTWAI

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see anything in the HUD proposal that requires RVIA certification and labeling, only that the RV meets the appropriate NFPA and ANSI minimum standards. Did I miss that?

Dutch
2001 GBM Landau 34' Class A
F-53 Chassis, Triton V10, TST TPMS
2011 Toyota RAV4 4WD/Remco pump
ReadyBrute Elite tow bar/brake system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, for example, use of any cooktop NOT approved by RVIA will cause failure during an RVIA inspection. That is the specific reason New Horizons stopped using Verona cooktops. Just as a minor example.

 

Of course, you do not have to have an RVIA compliant coach. Mine is not, and it does not have an RVIA sticker. But if that then makes it fall under HUD guidelines what is a manufacturer to do?

 

So what is it about the Verona cooktops that causes them to fail? And has New Horizon challenged RVIA on this item? And where in the HUD regulations does it say that RVs must have a RVIA sticker, because I sure missed that.

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So what is it about the Verona cooktops that causes them to fail? And has New Horizon challenged RVIA on this item? And where in the HUD regulations does it say that RVs must have a RVIA sticker, because I sure missed that.

The way I read the activity going on is that if you do not fall into the proposed standards then you by default fall into the HUD requirements. Since HUD seems to be the blanket coverage organization and the "escape" from that is the RV standards (and modular housing). So if you are not an RV then you are covered by HUD, assuming the trailer falls into he category HUD covers....and all trailers seem to - other than those "exempted" as RVs.

 

It is an interesting issue....I'm glad they are doing things to exempt "RV's", and I'm certainly not arguing they should not. But as an example, my trailer does not seem to be an "RV" by a cursory reading of their requirements. It has no RVIA sticker, it is larger than the RV "standards", and it certainly falls into the HUD area. I'm not proposing a solution, only saying that things that a "normal person" would consider to be an RV may not be judged as such by regulation.

Jack & Danielle Mayer #60376 Lifetime Member
Living on the road since 2000

PLEASE no PM's. Email me. jackdanmayer AT gmail
2016 DRV Houston 44' 5er (we still have it)
2022 New Horizons 43' 5er
2016 Itasca 27N 28' motorhome 
2019 Volvo 860, D13 455/1850, 236" wb, I-Shift, battery-based APU
No truck at the moment - we use one of our demo units
2016 smart Passion, piggyback on the truck
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
See our website for info on New Horizons 5th wheels, HDTs as tow vehicles, communications on the road, and use of solar power
www.jackdanmayer.com
Principal in RVH Lifestyles. RVH-Lifestyles.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears to me that the only change being made is a clearer distinction between park model RV's and manufactured housing. HUD has clearly stated that 5th wheels are exempt RV's for instance.

 

From the OP's Federal Register link:

 

"Subsequently, HUD also discovered that some Fifth Wheel Travel Trailers could also fall within HUD regulations. A Fifth-Wheel Travel Trailer is a towable recreational vehicle mounted on wheels and designed to be towed by a motorized vehicle by means of a towing mechanism that is mounted above or forward of the tow vehicle's rear axle. However, HUD has not exercised regulatory oversight over Fifth Wheel Travel Trailers and considered them as falling within the regulatory exemption." (emphasis added)

Dutch
2001 GBM Landau 34' Class A
F-53 Chassis, Triton V10, TST TPMS
2011 Toyota RAV4 4WD/Remco pump
ReadyBrute Elite tow bar/brake system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we may be overlooking the fact that the RVIA created ANSI A119.5 Standard only covers PMRV's (park models), and can pretty much be ignored for this discussion.

 

ANSI A119.5 Recreational Park Trailer Standard - Scope

 

NFPA 1192 and the applicable NHTSA requirements apply to our readily mobile RV's. I can find nothing in the related RVIA standards about certifying individual appliance brands or models.

Dutch
2001 GBM Landau 34' Class A
F-53 Chassis, Triton V10, TST TPMS
2011 Toyota RAV4 4WD/Remco pump
ReadyBrute Elite tow bar/brake system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading the RVIA press release, which was linked to in the email issued by Escapees, I agree with those, including the RVIA that it heads off a confrontation between HUD and parts of the RV industry. I am not sure of the contention of if you are not certified as an RV then you are automatically a manufactured home.

What it doesn't do is acknowledge the 500 lb gorilla sitting and snorting over in the corner of the room. And that is those individuals(like lots of us) who are without a doubt living full time and using as a permanent residence a structure clearly defined as an RV, which by the standards are not designed or intended for that purpose. The RV industry routinely points that out, and then is perfectly happy to sell is units that are clearly marketed as "full time units" against the caution in the fine print.

 

We are still in limbo on that one, and at the mercy of state and local statutes. This issue is running absolutely parallel to the "Tiny House Movement". Their needs and desires overlap ours in many ways. If our organization wants to work towards an acceptance of "non traditional housing" unifying with the Tiny House Movement might prove beneficial.

 

In the meantime, the clarifying of definitions, HUD vs RV industry seems to be a chance for many legal beagles to fatten the hours charged, and then go out and buy an RV, a big one.

Jeff Beyer temporarily retired from Trailer Transit
2000 Freightliner Argosy Cabover
2008 Work and Play 34FK
Homebase NW Indiana, no longer full time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing the RVIA and the story is failing entirely to mention is the real reason this matters so much to them.. Not the building codes/standards, which are rather insignificant in difference, but instead the issue's heavy relation to property taxes. Or rather the ability of permanent, non-moving RV dwellers to NOT pay property taxes at all.

Park models are specifically designed right up to the limits, essentially to be a way to sell the (smaller) equivalent to manufactured homes, but by calling park models "RVs", it allows discussion around whether its a permanent structure, requiring property taxes to be paid or not.
Especially in states like Texas, with huge property taxes.. Many people living permanently in park-models or fifth-wheels (and never moving) very specifically do so because it saves them $$ thousands every year in property taxes.

Counties (including I believe Polk County, of Escapees fame) have tried before to deem especially park-models (with permanent utility connections) as permanent structures, and hence liable for property tax payments. With varied luck.

If some RVs (especially Park models) suddenly under HUD fall into the Mobile Home category, it will

  1. Likely immediately make them liable for standard property taxes,
  2. Make some "RV Parks" with many permanent residents fall further into the Mobile Home park category, which can have heavy implications in some areas.
  3. Make the segment of RVIA creating semi- or fully-permanent "RVs" (park-models especially) loose sales.

If that happens, the RV industry will lose a significant segment of their customers.. Assuming prices on park-model "RVs" to be approximately the same as an equivalent mobile home to buy, and both of them suddenly liable for property taxes, why would anyone living stationary then buy a park model from the RV industry?? They might as well buy a mobile home from any other mobile home manufacturer. Clear competition for that RVIA segment. So a dividing line that need some clear definition, but not one that will necessarily make the "RV manufacturer" industry happy.
Hence the big push from RVIA and similar.. Not because its important to real RVers (on the move), but because its important to permanent dwellers, the main customer segment for these structures.

As far as advocacy goes, it might raise the question of who the Escapees should advocate for. Whether this is a discussion to get involved in. Less of an RVer discussion, than a "protect the park model industry from property taxes".

Remember the term "RV": RECREATIONAL Vehicle.. As in on the move, at least seasonally... Whether in constant travel mode or as snow birds moving maybe only a few times a year, but NOT sitting still permanently, living in an RV only because that avoids paying property taxes on their living structure.

You can usually clearly recognize the latter category, and I see it many times.. The outside furniture, grills, parasols, and other objects are not designed for travel at all.. Not collapsible, heavy, purchased at the local Home store. Residences movable only by calling in a moving truck; not by simply stowing a few objects in the RV and moving on. Also frequently recognized in parks I visit by the fact that there is no vehicle, able to move the RV, present at all.. Someone with for example a Park Model or a Fifthwheel, but no ownership of a truck that could ever move that home anywhere..

Also why some (real?) RV parks in their rules state that at all times, there must be a vehicle present capable of hauling that RV out.. (As in "Don't have your parents haul in their old RV and make this your permanent home. :P )

You also see the same in some of the "RV" Facebook groups... If you look at the profiles of people asking questions, many of them have never actually RVed (moved around) in their lives. They just happen to live in a Fifth-wheel or trailer.
Groups such as "Fulltime RVers" over time seem to move to be largely populated by (100%) permanent dwellers, and the discussion around "what is a real full-time RVer" have come up multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all states have the same tax structure when it comes to manufactured houses vs S&B. So the HUD determination doesn't determine tax structures, that is up to the states. And some states like AZ and Washington already tax park models as personal property. In fact we pay personal property taxes on our park model to Maricopa County each year. So a change in HUD determination would have no affect on us. You can't use one state as an example for all states.

 

In fact, I'm having a hard time figuring out what your rationale for the above treatise might be? You seem to be angry about something, but not sure what it is.

 

Barb

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...