Skip to main content

Phil Querin Q&A: Background Checks and the Fed's 7 Year Rule

Question.  I spoke with someone recently who informed me that Federal Law (i.e. the Fair Credit Reporting Act) prohibits criminal background checks beyond seven years.  Yet I am concerned that with some crimes, e.g. child molestation, it would be important to know if there were any convictions, not just those within the last seven years.  It also appears that HUD seems to be saying the same thing.  I am getting mixed information on this issue. Can you help clarify?

Phil Querin Q&A: Background Checks and the Fed's 7 Year Rule

Question.  I spoke with someone recently who informed me that Federal Law (i.e. the Fair Credit Reporting Act) prohibits criminal background checks beyond seven years.  Yet I am concerned that with some crimes, e.g. child molestation, it would be important to know if there were any convictions, not just those within the last seven years.  It also appears that HUD seems to be saying the same thing.  I am getting mixed information on this issue. Can you help clarify?

Phil Querin Q&A: Failure To Put Agreement In Writing - Failure to Qualify Resident

 

 

Q: A resident was having difficulty in selling their home in a manufactured home community. The resident was eventually transferred to California, and the landlord decided to be cooperative and allow the resident's niece to move in to the home until it was sold. The landlord had the niece filled out a complete application and did a background check. The landlord accepted the application, but did not send an acceptance or denial letter to the resident. The landlord also did not have the niece sign a rental agreement. Now 14 months later the home has still not been sold and the former resident's niece is still living in the home. The niece has been late on numerous occasions in paying rent, does not maintain the home and has an illegal dog (over the 20 lb limit). The landlord wants to take action, but the niece claims that he cannot take any action because there is no signed rental agreement. What can the landlord do at this point as far as sending 72 hour notices for late payment, notices for maintenance and notices for the illegal dog? What did the landlord do wrong in the application process?

 

 

 

 

Phil Querin Q&A: Failure To Put Agreement In Writing - Failure to Qualify Resident

 

 

Q: A resident was having difficulty in selling their home in a manufactured home community. The resident was eventually transferred to California, and the landlord decided to be cooperative and allow the resident's niece to move in to the home until it was sold. The landlord had the niece filled out a complete application and did a background check. The landlord accepted the application, but did not send an acceptance or denial letter to the resident. The landlord also did not have the niece sign a rental agreement. Now 14 months later the home has still not been sold and the former resident's niece is still living in the home. The niece has been late on numerous occasions in paying rent, does not maintain the home and has an illegal dog (over the 20 lb limit). The landlord wants to take action, but the niece claims that he cannot take any action because there is no signed rental agreement. What can the landlord do at this point as far as sending 72 hour notices for late payment, notices for maintenance and notices for the illegal dog? What did the landlord do wrong in the application process?

 

 

 

 

Senate Banking Committee Passes Bill Giving Manufactured Home Retailers and Sellers Relief from the Dodd-Frank Act

 

Last week, the Senate Banking Committee passed legislation to clarify that a manufactured housing retailer or seller is not considered a "loan originator" simply because they provide a customer with some assistance in the mortgage loan process.  This is a key tenet of S. 1751, the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act, which excludes manufactured housing retailers and sellers from the definition of a loan originator so long as they are only receiving compensation for the sale of a home.  

 

The language was passed as a part of S. 2155, the "Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act," which is a package of reforms intended to improve the national financial regulatory framework and promote economic growth. S. 2155 was passed by the Senate Banking Committee by a bipartisan vote of 16 to 7. 

 

In opening the Committee's consideration of the bill, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Crapo (R-ID) said, "The reforms in this bipartisan bill help tailor the current regulatory landscape, while ensuring safety and soundness and relieving the burden on American businesses that are unfairly being treated like the largest companies in our economy."  

 

MHI worked closely with Senator Joe Donnelly (D-IN), author of the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act (S. 1751) and long-time supporter of manufactured housing, to include this important consumer access provision in the package. The language, included in Section 107 of the package, amends the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) to exclude from the definition of "mortgage originator" an employee of a retailer of manufactured or modular homes who does not receive compensation or gain for taking residential mortgage loan applications while maintaining consumer protections. 

 

U.S. Senator Joe Donnelly said, "For many hard-working Hoosiers and Americans, manufactured housing provides the most affordable option available when they look to buy a home. I'm pleased the bipartisan regulatory relief legislation that I helped craft and that passed the Senate Banking Committee includes a provision based on my Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act. This measure would help prevent federal regulations from getting in the way of financing that families need as they step into homeownership."

 

The passage of S. 2155 by the Senate Banking Committee affirms MHI's longstanding position that it is inappropriate for a manufactured housing retailer or seller - whose business is to sell homes and who is not receiving any gain or compensation for minimally helping the borrower with the mortgage loan process - to be subjected to compliance requirements and potential liability for areas that are clearly designed to apply only to the actual entity making the mortgage loan. MHI will continue working with its champions as the bill moves through the legislative process.

 

The inclusion of this language in the Senate's financial regulatory relief package is the result of MHI's persistent efforts to ensure the needed changes contained in the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act are passed into law as soon as possible. In addition to the Senate regulatory reform package, H.R. 1699, the Preserving Access to Manufactured House Act, was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on December 1.  The language was also passed as a part of the House's financial reform package (H.R. 10) in June. In September, the House also passed the bill's provisions as a part of its Fiscal Year 2018 Appropriations package. 

Phil Querin Q&A: Home Damaged During Storm

Question.   Last week’s torrential rain caused significant riverbank erosion in our Park and has threatened a home.  What are the landlord’s rights and responsibilities in this situation?  The home will likely have to be moved.  Who pays and what are the timelines, responsibilities and liabilities? Should we accept rent during this time? What if the tenants walk away - abandonment apply under these circumstances?

Phil Querin Q&A: Home Damaged During Storm

Question.   Last week’s torrential rain caused significant riverbank erosion in our Park and has threatened a home.  What are the landlord’s rights and responsibilities in this situation?  The home will likely have to be moved.  Who pays and what are the timelines, responsibilities and liabilities? Should we accept rent during this time? What if the tenants walk away - abandonment apply under these circumstances?

Senate Banking Committee Draft Gives Manufactured Home Retailers Relief from the Dodd-Frank Act

Yesterday, the Senate Banking Committee released a bipartisan agreement to clarify that a manufactured housing retailer or seller is not considered a "loan originator" simply because they provide a customer with some assistance in the mortgage loan process.  This is a key tenet of the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act, which excludes manufactured housing retailers and sellers from the definition of a loan originator so long as they are only receiving compensation for the sale of a home. 

MHI successfully argued that just as a real estate agent's sales commission does not make him or her a loan originator under current law, a similar distinction is needed for those selling manufactured homes.  While they are only in the business of selling homes and do not originate loans, manufactured home retailers and sellers currently run the risk of being considered mortgage loan originators. This is problematic because loan originators must comply with licensing or qualification requirements that are completely unrelated and irrelevant to manufactured home retailers and sellers.  This agreement affirms MHI's longstanding position that it is inappropriate for a manufactured housing retailer - whose business is to sell homes and who is not receiving any gain or compensation for minimally helping the borrower with the mortgage loan process - to be subjected to costly and labor-intensive activities that are clearly designed to apply to the actual individual making the mortgage loan.

The manufactured housing language was a part of a bipartisan regulatory reform package drafted by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID). A bipartisan group of nine Republicans and nine Democrats cosponsored the measure, including: Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Bob Corker (R-Tennessee), Tim Scott (R-South Carolina), Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota), David Perdue (R-Georgia), Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), John Kennedy (R-Louisiana), Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), Joe Donnelly (D-Indiana), Heidi Heitkamp (D-North Dakota), Jon Tester (D-Montana), Mark Warner (D-Virginia), Tim Kaine (D-Virginia), Angus King (I-Maine), Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri), and Gary Peters (D-Michigan). 

The provision is in Section 107 of the package, which is within the title of the bill dealing with improving consumer access to mortgage credit.  Specifically, Section 107 amends the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) to exclude from the definition of "mortgage originator" an employee of a retailer of manufactured or modular homes who does not receive compensation or gain for taking residential mortgage loan applications while maintaining consumer protections. Senator Joe Donnelly (D-IN), author of the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act (S. 1751) and long-time supporter of manufactured housing, strongly advocated for inclusion of this important consumer access provision in the package. 

The Senate's bipartisan reform package is expected to be considered by the Senate Banking Committee in the coming weeks. MHI will continue working with its champions as the package moves through the legislative process. 

The inclusion of this language in the Senate's financial regulatory relief package is the result of MHI's persistent efforts to ensure the needed changes contained in the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act are passed into law as soon as possible. In addition to the Senate regulatory reform package, the full Preserving Access to Manufactured House Act was passed as a part of the House's financial reform package (H.R. 10) in June.   In September, the House also passed the bill's provisions as a part of its Fiscal Year 2018 Appropriations package.