New Proposed Legislation Intended To Change Definition Of Manufactured Housing Versus Recreational Vehicles
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently adopted new language for a suggested 2014 memorandum aiming to draw a more distinct line between recreational vehicles and manufactured housing. The issue initially transpired in 2014 when HUD uncovered that some manufacturers were producing park model recreational vehicles (PMRVs), and even some fifth wheel RVs, in excess of the 400 square foot threshold exempting them from HUD’s regulatory oversight. With this exemption, RVs are not held to the same construction standards as a manufactured house and more specifically define a recreational vehicle as:
(1) Built on a single chassis;
(2) 400 Square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projections;
(3) Self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and
(4) Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.
Coinciding with the popularity of the RV lifestyle surging to all-time highs, resulting in some even setting up shop on permanent lots, RV manufacturers are pushing size limitations with the expansion of slide outs, awnings, attached porches and other expandable accessories. Subsequently, the distinction between recreational vehicles and manufactured housing becomes a bit more muddled.
“[In the 1970s] there was not a lot of difference between a typical manufactured home and a typical RV so what you ended up seeing was manufactured houses and RVs as basically the same sort of product,” Matt Wald, Executive Director of Park Model RVs at RVIA, told The Buzz. Over the years, as manufactured houses got larger, in particular, with the advent of the double-wide trailer, and RV manufacturers began catering to a more mobile customer “there was a divergence between the RV industry and the manufactured housing industry.”
“In 1982 to address that [divergence], HUD passed a regulation that exempted RVs from manufactured housing standards [by creating] a list of criteria,” explained Wald, referring to the four points defining a recreational vehicle. “If the unit met that criteria, then they were considered to be an RV and not a manufactured home. [That] criteria still stands today.”
In an effort to “revise the exemption for recreational vehicles that are not self-propelled from HUD’s Manufactured Housing Procedural and Enforcement Regulations” the proposed new rule would define an RV as follows:
“A recreational vehicle is a factory built vehicular structure designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy, built and certified in accordance with NFPA 1192-15 or ANSI A119.5-09 consensus standards for recreational vehicles and not certified as a manufactured home.”
Additionally, “to ensure consumer awareness of the difference between manufactured housing and recreational vehicles and the construction standards used to build each” the new rule would require that each structure seeking an exemption from HUD’s oversight to prominently display a notice “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.”
Wald has taken issue with this request citing that, “park model [RVs] already have a design intent included on the RVIA seal that goes on every unit.” Regardless of the redundancy, Wald denoted that this stature would require implementation at a dealership level and not in a manufacturer’s factory making the RVIA feel “a little nervous that HUD is overreaching a bit and trying to go beyond their authority.”
From an industry perspective, the new changes have been applauded by manufacturers and garnered support from those such as U.S. Rep. Marlin Stutzman who co-authored the Recreational Vehicle Certainty Act along with Congresswoman Jackie Walorski, expressing that “the clear difference in federal law between RVs and manufactured housing is an important distinction for those companies that build them.” Stutzman has also authored letters and proposed legislation he believes “have moved us one step closer to giving these businesses the clarity they need to create jobs and continue building great products.”
While many on the RV industry side are counting this clarity as a win, many on the consumer spectrum feel their full-time RV lifestyle could soon be under the microscope and zooming in on their permanent homes being defined under law as “only for recreational use.”
Thousands of individuals took to the Federal Register, where the rule was open for comment, to voice their mostly opposing opinions online. Rather than eliminating it completely, it seems consumers are seeking more modified language to secure the longevity and legal assurance of a lifestyle so heavily marketed by the RV industry. Many commenters maintained reservations of the new rule fearing the current language could set precedence for future scrutiny:
“Before making a rule that requires manufacturers to post that their recreational vehicle are not intended for permanent residency, there needs to be a new set of regulations that would cover recreational vehicles that could also be lived in full-time. Another option would be to have the notice read similar to ‘while this has not been inspected to meet the requirements of a manufactured home, the manufacture has no reason to believe that it could not be used as a primary residence.”
Wald contended that, “[Consumer] confusion [has] really played itself out in the comments on the proposed rule”. People thought “HUD was somehow trying to stop [them] from living in tiny houses or full-timing in RVs”. The reality is that “HUD controls the standards and how the product is designed and built [while] how consumers use RV products and housing products are determined at the state and local level.”
Going forward, HUD is now obligated to reply to the comments they received [but] have an undefined period of time to do so. Wald also conceded that, “the wheels of bureaucracy grind slowly in Washington” but that HUD’s proposed rule is acceptable to the RV industry. “We’re hoping [it’s finalized] this year, but if it’s next year we won’t be surprised.”