Oregon

Phil Querin Article - Elderly Residents Who Leave the Community

 

In communities with elderly tenants, landlords are frequently confronted with the question “How do I deal with their home and their care providers when they leave, and with their estates?”

 

Most of the answers can be found in the abandonment statute, ORS 90.675.  The underlying premise to remember in addressing all of these issues, is that if the resident leaves the community without properly disposing of their home, the landlord has no choice but to deal with it as an abandonment. 

 

 

Phil Querin Q&A - Drones and Your Community

Question.  Our community is updating our rules and regulations. Should we include anything about the use of drones flying over people’s backyards?  Can this be controlled for privacy's sake?

 

Civil Law. On the civil side (as opposed to the criminal side) of the law, the common law tort concepts of negligence, assault, invasion of privacy (applying the “reasonable expectation” test), and nuisance, still apply, as does the law of trespass to real property. In such cases, the plaintiff would have a right to sue for damages.  However, with only limited exceptions, prevailing attorney fees are not available.

 

Airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), regulates airspace, including that which is above private land. So knowing the state, and federal laws, is critical before using drones.

 

Conclusion.  As you can see, most of these prohibitions are found in one form or another, without the necessity of being addressed in your community rules. However, given their ubiquitous presence, especially by folks who are just hobbyists, I do suggest having some rules. Why? Because if someone was using a drone for their own prurient interests, e.g. flying over someone’s fenced backyard, or for harassment purposes, it’s far easier for management to take action against the perpetrator for a rules violation, than it is telling an offended or harassed resident to file a lawsuit or criminal complaint.

 


[1] Oregon law also identifies “critical infrastructure facilities” for which it is a violation of the law to fly a drone over them at an altitude of under 400 feet.

[2] All of which are addressed in the 2016 law.

Phil Querin Q&A - Drones and Your Community

Question.  Our community is updating our rules and regulations. Should we include anything about the use of drones flying over people’s backyards?  Can this be controlled for privacy's sake?

 

Civil Law. On the civil side (as opposed to the criminal side) of the law, the common law tort concepts of negligence, assault, invasion of privacy (applying the “reasonable expectation” test), and nuisance, still apply, as does the law of trespass to real property. In such cases, the plaintiff would have a right to sue for damages.  However, with only limited exceptions, prevailing attorney fees are not available.

 

Airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), regulates airspace, including that which is above private land. So knowing the state, and federal laws, is critical before using drones.

 

Conclusion.  As you can see, most of these prohibitions are found in one form or another, without the necessity of being addressed in your community rules. However, given their ubiquitous presence, especially by folks who are just hobbyists, I do suggest having some rules. Why? Because if someone was using a drone for their own prurient interests, e.g. flying over someone’s fenced backyard, or for harassment purposes, it’s far easier for management to take action against the perpetrator for a rules violation, than it is telling an offended or harassed resident to file a lawsuit or criminal complaint.

 


[1] Oregon law also identifies “critical infrastructure facilities” for which it is a violation of the law to fly a drone over them at an altitude of under 400 feet.

[2] All of which are addressed in the 2016 law.

Phil Querin Article - Some Tips and Traps - The FED Eviction Process

 

The eviction process can be daunting to those landlords and managers who rarely, if ever, have been involved in the unpleasant task of trying to remove a tenant from a community.  An eviction (formally known as a “forcible entry and detainer” or “FED”) is an expedited legal procedure designed to allow landlords to obtain possession of their property through the court system.

 

 

Phil Querin Q&A - Multiple Question on Water Sub Metering

Questions. My question is in regards to sewer and water pass throughs: 

1. Is it still true, that you can pass through utilities?

2.  If so, what is a reasonable time for notice? 

3.  The newer MHCO space rental agreements do have a provision for pass through, however what if a tenant has been in the park for years & there is no provision for pass through on a rental agreement that they signed?  

4.  I do know of a MHP that does pass through and they send a bifurcated bill- one for utilities and one for space rent.  However, most tenants pay with one check or money order.  I have a MHP in Southern Oregon and the sewer is a fixed amount, so it would be easy to divide that amount up between the tenants, obviously with a proviso that if the sewer bill increases or decreases we would make an adjustment to the bill.

 

A MHP that does pass through water and sewer told me that their bill decreased by about 30% because the tenants knew they were now paying for the water and tried to conserve.  They knew their bill would be reduced if they used less water.  In my Southern Oregon MHP, the sewer is a fixed amount so that incentive would not be there unless the sewer district decreased their bill to the park and I had not intended to pass through water at this time.  NOTE:  If I metered the park it would be very expensive & I would have to take each tenant to small claims if they didn't pay.  Even though it's the same with pass through, the tenants don't get bill separately each month, so it looks different.

 

 

MHCO Legislative Update - 2017 Oregon Legislature Ends - House Speaker Vows To Continue Push for Rent Control

After working through much of the 4th of July weekend and holiday legislators wrapped up their legislative business today. The last bill that MHCO opposed - HB 2004B - did not move out of the Senate. The Senate Rules Committee adopted numerous amendments none of which could get the necessary 16 votes in the Senate to pass. So - no rent control and no changes to ‘no cause’ eviction. 

Phil Querin Q&A - Home Removal Blocked & Landslides

 

Question. A tenant is being forced to move his home because of a landslide. The home is currently in ABC Park and the tenant wants to move it to XYZ Park. However, there are a couple of trees blocking the home from being moved out. Management of ABC Park claims the trees aren't dead so they can't cut them down.  Is the home forced to stay in ABC Park because of the trees blocking and keeping the home from moving?  If the trees have to be cut down - who pays?  Does ABC Park have any obligation to pay for the move since the home is being forced out because of the landslide?

 

 

Phil Querin Q&A: Temporary Occupant Overstays Her Welcome

 

Question. I have a question about the MHCO Temporary Occupant Agreement (MHCO Form 25).  I have a friend who is a tenant in a park. He allowed a woman to move into his home with him. The landlord, the woman and he then signed a MHCO Temporary Occupant Agreement.  I do not know what the duration was, i.e. month-to-month or for a fixed term.

 

After a while the tenant realized this was a big mistake and asked her to leave; she refused.  As I understand it, the landlord has also asked her to vacate, and she again refused.  The park owner does not really want to push the issue in court.  She has told the tenant that he will have to have her legally evicted if he wants her out.

 

Recently, after she left town for several days, the tenant changed the door locks.  Upon returning and being unable to gain access, she called the County Sheriff's Office. The responding deputy told the tenant/home owner that he could not require her to leave the premises. He even said that if she forced entry, she could not be arrested for the trespass. He said she had established residency at the home, and had full legal right to remain there until a court eviction occurred.  She has been in the home beginning approximately December 2016.  The woman has never paid any rent.  

 

I would think she was committing a criminal trespass where either the landlord or the tenant revoked consent to her being at the space.  What can he do? I am interested in case I have this situation in my community.