Search

Answer. By all means. The bases for terminating a tenancy are found in ORS 90.630; there are several. It provides that '_the landlord may terminate a rental agreement that is a month-to-month or fixed term tenancy for space for a manufactured dwelling or floating home by giving to the resident not less than 30 days' notice in writing before the date designated in the notice for termination if the resident. Among others, the following are listed:

• If the resident violates a law or ordinance related to the resident's conduct as a resident, including but not limited to a material noncompliance with ORS 90.740 (Resident obligations); and

• If the resident violates a rule or rental agreement provision related to the resident's conduct as a resident and imposed as a condition of occupancy.

The definition of a "law" is a state statute. The section of the landlord-resident law (ORS 90.100) does not expressly define "ordinance" but does define "building and housing codes" to include '_any law, ordinance or governmental regulation concerning fitness for habitation, or the construction, maintenance, operation, occupancy, use or appearance of any premises or dwelling unit."

Elsewhere, a good definition of an ordinance is the following:

An ordinance is a law enacted by a municipal body, such as a city council or county commission (sometimes called county council or county board of supervisors). Ordinances govern matters not already covered by state or federal laws such as zoning, safety and building regulations. (See, http://www.lectlaw.com/ def2/ o045.htm)

So, do you need to expressly provide in your rules or rental agreement that residents must obey all state laws and local ordinances? No. In legal parlance, ORS 90.630 is "self-executing", i.e. it is effective by its own terms. [1]

However, if you are using the MHCO Lease or Rental Agreement, the forms contain text that expressly states what ORS 90.630 already provides. This is the "belts and suspenders" approach to park management.

So if a resident has a pet, you want to make sure they comply with all of the local ordinances as well as any specific rules and regulations you may have - even if the rules and regulations are stricter than the local ordinances.[2] In order to avoid unpleasant surprises, I suggest you prepare a separate "Pet Policy" handout for residents, prospective and current, making sure that it correctly states exactly which ordinances you intend to apply,[3] together with all park rules that are not already covered by the applicable laws.

[1] To be clear, however, if the park is located in Deschutes County, you may not enforce a Jefferson County ordinance unless you have incorporated that ordinance in your rules, either directly or by reference. As I said above, you may impose rules that are stricter than those found in your local jurisdiction, but you have to expressly include them in your rules.

[2] Note that if you have not been enforcing current laws, ordinances or park rules regarding pets, you may run into some push-back if you have not enforced them previously, e.g. pet size, breed, or number. Certainly, if a resident has one pet, and your pet policy is set at one, you want to make sure that you keep all non-violating residents at that number. In my opinion, your failure to enforce a rule, law or ordinance against one resident who has two pets, does not mean you may not enforce it against other residents with only one, on a going forward basis.

[3] Out of an abundance of caution, I would identify all the important ordinances, either verbatim or carefully summarized, but make it clear that this Pet Policy is for "informational purposes only", and is not to be construed as being in lieu of the actual law or ordinance. Always include the citation to the law or ordinance you are summarizing or quoting.

Answer: Much depends on your rules and rental agreement, which you've not addressed. For purposes of my response, I will assume that one or both of these documents require that if a resident wants to have a person live with them at the home, they must so notify the landlord, get a background check and have management approval. If they are going to go onto the lease, then their credit record becomes important, and they would have to provide financial information as well. If the person will not be living there as a resident, then they could enter into a temporary occupancy agreement under ORS 90.275.

However, in your case, assuming that this person is actually a pedophile with a criminal record, he is not someone you want in the community under any circumstances. If he was a resident who signed a rental agreement or lease, Oregon law provides that you may terminate it by giving him not less than 30 days' notice if he is classified as a level three sex offender under ORS181.800 (Risk assessment tool) (3) or is determined to be a predatory sex offender under ORS 181.838 (Juvenile predatory sex offender defined). (See, 90.630(1)(c).

However, this person is a visitor/guest - you are not legally obligated to permit him in the community if he poses a threat to other persons, or interrupts their peaceful enjoyment. You certainly do not have to give 30-days' notice for him to vacate.

You should promptly contact the mother and tell her that the son must leave. If you are willing to give him a short period of time to find other living arrangements, make sure that he is not loitering around the community. If this is a family park, I would not permit him much more than three days to be gone. He should be warned not to come back. If he and his mother want to visit, it must be outside the community.

If the mother refuses to cooperate, you should contact the local police, and ask them what protocol they would like to you follow to have him removed as a trespasser. In most cases, you would first issue him a written notice (with copy to the mother) informing him that he is not welcomed in the community, and if he comes back after a certain date, you will call the police and have him removed as a trespasser.

Hopefully, this will resolve the matter. If it does not, either because he is seen still coming back into the community, you may have to issue the mother a 30-day notice under ORS 90.630 for violating the rules and/or rental agreement. The rule that would likely apply would prohibit persons from staying in homes as occupants or guests without landlord approval. In such case, you would have to issue her a 30-day notice for cause.

Lastly, until this matter is resolved, I don't recommend accepting rent from the mother (or son). If she pays, return it within ten (10) days after receipt. See, ORS 9i0.412(3)(a).

Answer. ORS 90.730(3)(c) provides:

A landlord who rents a space for a manufactured dwelling or floating home shall at all times during the tenancy maintain the rented space, vacant spaces in the facility and the facility common areas in a habitable condition. The landlord does not have a duty to maintain a dwelling or home. A landlord's habitability duty under this section includes only the matters described in subsections (3) to (6) of this section.

(3)For purposes of this section, a rented space is considered unhabitable if it substantially lacks:

(c)A water supply and a connection to the space approved under applicable law at the time of installation and maintained so as to provide safe drinking water and to be in good working order to the extent that the water supply system can be controlled by the landlord; (Emphasis added.)

In relevant part, ORS 90.365 provides:

(1) If contrary to the rental agreement or ORS 90.320 (Landlord to maintain premises in habitable condition) or 90.730 (Landlord duty to maintain rented space, vacant spaces and common areas in habitable condition) the landlord intentionally or negligently fails to supply any essential service, the tenant may give written notice to the landlord specifying the breach and that the tenant may seek substitute services, diminution in rent damages or substitute housing. After allowing the landlord a reasonable time and reasonable access under the circumstances to supply the essential service, the tenant may:

(a)Procure reasonable amounts of the essential service during the period of the landlord's noncompliance and deduct their actual and reasonable cost from the rent;

(b)Recover damages based upon the diminution in the fair rental value of the dwelling unit; or

(c)If the failure to supply an essential service makes the dwelling unit unsafe or unfit to occupy, procure substitute housing during the period of the landlord's noncompliance, in which case the tenant is excused from paying rent for the period of the landlord's noncompliance. In addition, the tenant may recover as damages from the landlord the actual and reasonable cost or fair and reasonable value of comparable substitute housing in excess of the rent for the dwelling unit. For purposes of this paragraph, substitute housing is comparable if it is of a quality that is similar to or less than the quality of the dwelling unit with regard to basic elements including cooking and refrigeration services and, if warranted, upon consideration of factors such as location in the same area as the dwelling unit, the availability of substitute housing in the area and the expense relative to the range of choices for substitute housing in the area. A tenant may choose substitute housing of relatively greater quality, but the tenant's damages shall be limited to the cost or value of comparable substitute housing.

(2)If contrary to the rental agreement or ORS 90.320 (Landlord to maintain premises in habitable condition) or 90.730 (Landlord duty to maintain rented space, vacant spaces and common areas in habitable condition) the landlord fails to supply any essential service, the lack of which poses an imminent and serious threat to the tenant's health, safety or property, the tenant may give written notice to the landlord specifying the breach and that the rental agreement shall terminate in not less than 48 hours unless the breach is remedied within that period. If the landlord adequately remedies the breach before the end of the notice period, the rental agreement shall not terminate by reason of the breach. As used in this subsection, "imminent and serious threat to the tenant's health, safety or property" shall not include the presence of radon, asbestos or lead-based paint or the future risk of flooding or seismic hazard, as defined by ORS 455.447 (Regulation of certain structures vulnerable to earthquakes and tsunamis).

(3) For purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a landlord shall not be considered to be intentionally or negligently failing to supply an essential service if:

(a)The landlord substantially supplies the essential service; or

(b)The landlord is making a reasonable and good faith effort to supply the essential service and the failure is due to conditions beyond the landlord's control. (Emphasis added.)

So based upon my reading of the italicized sections, my take is that if the issue is truly an act of God - i.e. it was truly beyond your control - then the failure of the system for those days is not something for which the resident has a remedy against you. Of course, "the devil's in the details", if you'll pardon the pun. You have not indicated what cause all of the pipes to burst at one time. Was it earth movement, a systemic failure that you could not have foreseen?

As you can see from these sections, residents do have significant rights when loss of habitability issues occur. So before butting heads with the resident, make sure you're on sound footing. Caveat: I have not researched the Oregon case law recently to see how these statutes have been interpreted by Oregon's appellate courts.

A Cautionary Tale. But here is the risk you assume if you simply issue a 72-hour notice and file for eviction:

In a nonpayment of rent eviction, a good tenant's attorney can frequently retain possession for his/her client, even though they clearly failed to pay the rent when due. All it takes is a little familiarity with that labyrinthine set of statutes in Oregon's Residential Landlord Tenant Act, or "RLTA."

However, oftentimes it is not until the first appearance following the filing of the eviction that the landlord discovers that the tenant has gone to an attorney and is now raising various counterclaims. In your case, it was be for the failure to provide an essential service.

Assuming that the tenant has the money to pay the entire rent due, this is a battle that you are almost certain to lose. The reason is found in the rent-tender statute, ORS 90.370 (Tenant Counterclaims). Essentially, this statute, and several cases that have construed it, permit the tenant to tender the past-due rent into Court, even though it was not paid during the 72-hour period set forth in your notice. At the conclusion of the case, if the Court finds that the amount tendered into Court covers the amount found to be due, the tenant automatically retains possession. The tenant is permitted to hedge their bet.

Example: Landlord files an eviction against Tenant based upon the failure to pay monthly rent of $400. Tenant files counterclaims alleging habitability violations, and claims that because of the deficiencies, the market rent for the premises is only $200 per month. Tenant has had possession for seven months (including the month for which rent was not paid) and asks for the return of $200 for each of the prior six months. Tenant tenders $400 into Court prior to the commencement of trial. Assuming that the claims are in good faith, here are the various scenarios:

1. Worst Case for You: The Court finds in favor of the tenant, awarding him a judgment for $1,200 (6 months X $200) plus costs and attorney fees.

2. Best Case for You: Although the Court finds against tenant on his counterclaims, and therefor finds that the amount due to you is the full $400, since it has already been tendered into Court, the tenant is allowed to retain possession and may submit a request for recovery of his costs and attorney fees.

The only exception to the "Best Case" scenario is where you are able to convince the Court that the counterclaims are improper and/or have been filed in bad faith. In that case, the rent tender will do the tenant no good, and if the tenant loses his counterclaims, he will be evicted and become subject to a judgment for your costs and attorney fees.

So, when should a landlord fight to evict a tenant for nonpayment of rent, where the tenant has made a tender into Court? Only in the following situations: (a) Where the landlord is confident that he/she can convince the Court that the counterclaims were filed in bad faith; or, (b) Where the rent tender is believed to be inadequate and the tenant's attorney does not know that the shortfall could be tendered into Court. In virtually every other situation, the odds of winning a contested nonpayment of rent eviction where there has been a rent tender are very rare.

Conclusion. I agree with you that it would be bad precedent to permit this situation to continue, as it could metastasize throughout the rest of the community of affected residents. I also agree that it would be unwise to accept partial rent, unless you could do so with a written agreement where the tenant acknowledges that you are not waiving the shortfall.

I suggest that you thoroughly vet the cause of the bursting pipes, so as to leave no doubt that a failure of maintenance was not the problem. Speak to one or more experts and try to get a written statement as to the cause. With that you might then try to reason with the tenant - if that's possible. Reasoning with a person who refuses to obtain legal advice is often difficult.

One possibility is to privately meet with the resident and see if some accommodation can be reached. If we're only talking about $90.00 (6X$15), perhaps he would agree to pay the full rent, and you could provide some ancillary park service of equivalent service for free. I'm sure this doesn't sound attractive, but if he sticks to his guns, the end game will likely not end well for you - unless you have thoroughly vetted the issue of responsibility and provided him with proof that this was an act of God.

There is another, slightly imaginative, but possibly effective, solution: Issue a 72-hour notice for each month he tenders partial rent that you reject (making sure you photo each check), and then on the third one, issue a non-curable 30-day notice under Oregon's three-strike law. (See, ORS 90.630(8)).

By: Dale Strom

Dale Strom is a second generation Manufactured Home Community landlord. He is a Board Member, past President and current Treasurer of MHCO and owns two manufactured home communities in Oregon.

This is the fifth of a multiple part series on a private owner of a Manufactured Home Community willingly attempting to sell that Community to an Association of tenants within that Community. Riverbend MHP is a 39 space community located within the city limits of Clatskanie, OR.

The fourth part of this series covered a period of time immediately after the tenants met with representatives from CASA to early October where both parties were anticipating to sign a purchase agreement on November 1. This period of time of will encompass almost 5 months.

The author is called by both CASA's Executive Director and the Development Manager. Obviously, there is something that isn't going according to schedule. Obviously, November 1 will come and go without the completion of the sale.

Before we get back to the phone call from CASA, a few details that occurred after September 1 were not mentioned in thefourth part of this series.

THE PAPERWORK PROCESS - The Cooperative requested an appraisal on Riverbend for the purpose of financing. An application for Capital Needs Assessment was required to fund the appraisal. Although this process was a few days late, this shouldn't delay the sale, if any, at all. The request for the appraisal was made on or around September 17. The completed appraisal was submitted to the State on October 16.

The appraisal, once completed, is the last and remaining document for the application process. The application then activates the underwriting process. When the State grants its approval of the underwritten application, it is then forwarded to the Oregon Housing Stability Council (HSC) for the final approval. So, who then gives the financing approval?

Grant agreements are then drafted and agreed to by CASA, the Cooperative and the Department of Justice for comments and approval of the funds needed to finance this purchase agreement. Once the agreement has gone through the many approvals and those signatures have been secured, the sale then gets the go ahead. The closing is all that remains. 

PARK OPERATIONS - Always in the back of my mind in the 4thquarter of each year is budgeting and my assessment for a need to increase the rent. Scheduled rent increases that I have asked of the tenants usually takes place on January 1. If the sale does not go through as expected, I will need to start in late September on implementing the increase.

All Oregon MHP landlords know that when they feel that they must increase their rents, that landlord will immediately turn to their Oregon Revised Statutes and go directly go to ORS 90.600. Those landlords will then be reminded that all tenants will need to be given a 90 day notification upon a landlords need for such an increase. In this case, I needed to get my notifications in the mail by September 26 to insure that the tenants did get their notices by September 30 in time for the January 1 implementation. (In Oregon, a tenant needs to be properly served via first class mail so that the notices are in their possession for the full 90 days before the rent is due).

My tenants were now aware that if I was still the owner of the community on January, their rents were now to be increased from $370 to $380 per month for the New Year. (Yes, that is the going rate of MHP rents in the small city). The request for the rent increase at the beginning of the year would become prophetic in more than one way.

Now we have an appraisal, capital needs assessment, an application, a submittal to the State for underwriting, approval by HSC for final approval, financing and finally approval by the Department of Justice, CASA and the Cooperative. And then we are ready for a closing on November 1. What could possibly go wrong???

Receiving the phone call from the Executive Director and Development Manager of CASA, they informed me that the events of their due diligence, application and approval process leading to a final sale was running behind their timeline. Their request was that we agree to and move back the closing date to March 1.

If you remember from the first part of this series, I wanted to sell this community for several reasons. I thought that the possible sale to the tenants would work for me because I was not going to exercise my 1031 option and I wanted to sell but didn't need to sell. The exemption of the State Capital Gains was another huge benefit that does not go ignored. I could wait when the purchasing party was ready.

I also mentioned in the first part of the series that my terms on selling would increase the Ernest Money by $10,000 per month for 2 months for any delay by the buyer for this sale.

CASA did want to delay the sale of the park back to March 1 because of delays of the process that the buyer needs to achieve in this process. It appears that the delay could possibly be with the Department of Justice. It has been suggested to me that the DOJ accomplishes its work on its timeline and doesn't have any kind of fast track program for this type of case. Whatever the delays were, the Ernest Money was increased by $20,000.

Then there is the case of my onsite manager. She has been there the entire 12 _ years that I have owned the community. She has spoken to me over the past 2 or more years about retirement and spending more time for herself and family. She does not want the responsibility of park management anymore. My agreement with my manager when I signed the Purchase Agreement was that she would work for me until November 1. This was extended another month, when the extension by CASA was requested. My manager still resides in the park and will continue to live there as a tenant. 

During this time, I have also been in frequent contact with the Coop board President and the Treasurer about the status of the park. This can lead to problems of a conflict of interest here although the best interest of the Community is most important to both parties. I continue to speak with the onsite manager regarding the status of the park. When it is necessary to speak with the 2 board members, usually the conversation will swerve into the current status of the park and how some issues need immediate attention. With all that has occurred since the formation of the board for the Cooperative, I can honestly say that I have had a great working relationship with both the President and the Treasurer. Also adding that they, in no way, have acted in my behalf to take care of any issues that I have a need to accomplish. I have seen this as phasing out my current manager and bring in the new ownership.

I do look forward to closing this deal in that we have been working on this sale for almost 5 months. Now I look at this delay from another standpoint. We are getting late in 2018. Pushing this sale back into 2019 will make tax planning much easier in that I have more time to do that planning. In addition, the rent increase will be implemented on schedule on January 1. It became prophetic in that the $380 rent is the amount that the Cooperative will start asking its members upon closing.

It remains to be seen if this rent in the long run can be sustained by the Cooperative or if an adjustment of the rent will need to be made.

Now that we are targeting the close sometime in the first quarter of 2019, I can now anticipate enjoying the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays. But I also need to find the proper way to sell" the 2 park owned homes to the "occupants" (not a complete legal description of the habitants) of those homes.

Recently

Answer: You haven'tindicated whether this person is a long-term tenant or perhaps just a "vacation occupant." Under Oregon law, a "vacation occupant" is someone who: (1) Rents the RV space for vacation purposes only, not as a principal residence, (2) has a principal residence other than at the RV park, and (3) does not occupy the RV park for more than 45 days. You would need to have these facts documented in some type of written agreement. "Vacation occupants" are not "tenants" under Oregon law. They can be asked to leave without any eviction proceedings and the sheriff can be called to assist if necessary.

Assuming this person is an actual "tenant" (weekly, monthly, or fixed-term), then in the hierarchy of the quickest ways to get him out is cash. While this might sound counterintuitive to many landlords, I always advise my clients that it is sometimes far cheaper and quicker to get a tenant out by simply paying them to leave. This tactic is most effective when done shortly after issuing an eviction notice to the tenant using a "carrot and stick" approach. If the tenant isn'twilling to settle by accepting a payment to leave, then you can rely on the eviction notice.

The type of eviction notice will depend on the type of tenancy. Fixed-term tenants will require a for-cause notice (i.e., for breaking a park rule). Weekly tenants can be given a 10-day, no-cause eviction notice. Monthly tenants can be evicted with a 30-day, no-cause notice during the first year of their tenancy. After the first year, the no-cause notice to a monthly tenant would need to be a 60-day notice. (Caveat: Portland and Milwaukie both have city ordinances requiring 90-day no-cause notices to all monthly tenants, regardless of how long they have been tenants.)

Also keep in mind that 72-hour rent nonpayment notices can be used if the tenant isn'ttimely paying the rent. This is sometimes an effective and quick tool in getting a tenant out of the park as well. Even if you've already issued a no-cause notice, you can still use a 72-hour notice in the meantime if the tenant decides to stop paying his rent.

If the tenant refuses to vacate by the deadline in whatever eviction notice you have used, then you will need to file an eviction case against him in your county's circuit court. That process can take anywhere from 3-6 weeks. However, even during that period you can still use the settlement tool of a payment to have him leave if he is willing to accept. You can point out to the tenant that if he is evicted by a court judgment, he may have a harder time finding a landlord who is willing to accept him as a tenant.

A final word of warning to seek the assistance of a competent attorney if you are unfamiliar with the strict statutory process that must be followed when issuing eviction notices. A good attorney can also help you try to settle the case with the tenant, and ideally obtain a written settlement agreement confirming the move-out terms and releasing all legal claims between the parties relating to the tenancy.

Answer. Here is a quick summary of ORS 90.725, the access statute for manufactured housing communities; it is quite long and complicated.

A landlord or a landlord's agent may enter onto a rented space, not including the tenant's manufactured dwelling or floating home or an accessory building or structure, in order

• to inspect
• to make necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations or improvements, supply necessary or agreed services, perform agreed yard maintenance, equipment servicing or grounds keeping or exhibit the space to prospective or actual purchasers of the facility, mortgagees, tenants, workers or contractors.

The right of access of the landlord or landlord's agent is limited as follows:

• serving notices
• emergency
• tenant requested repairs or maintenance
• per written yard maintenance agreement requires the landlord to perform yard maintenance, equipment servicing or grounds keeping for the space:

In all other cases, unless there is an agreement between the landlord and the tenant to the contrary regarding a specific entry, the landlord shall give the tenant at least 24 hours' actual notice of the intent of the landlord to enter and the landlord or landlord's agent may enter only at reasonable times. The landlord or landlord's agent may not enter if the tenant, after receiving the landlord's notice, denies consent to enter. The tenant must assert this denial of consent by giving actual notice of the denial to the landlord or the landlord's agent prior to, or at the time of, the attempt by the landlord or landlord's agent to enter.

A landlord shall not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant. A tenant shall not unreasonably withhold consent from the landlord to enter.

A landlord has no other right of access except:

• pursuant to court order;
• as permitted by ORS 90.410 (2) (Tenant's failure to give notice of absence);
• as permitted under ORS 90.539 (Entry to read submeter); or
• when the tenant has abandoned or relinquished the premises.

If the tenant refuses to allow lawful access, the landlord may obtain injunctive relief to compel access or may terminate the rental agreement pursuant to ORS 90.630 (1) and take possession in the manner provided in ORS 105.105 to 105.168. In addition, the landlord may recover actual damages.

If the landlord makes an unlawful entry or a lawful entry in an unreasonable manner or makes repeated demands for entry otherwise lawful but that have the effect of unreasonably harassing the tenant, the tenant may obtain injunctive relief to prevent the reoccurrence of the conduct or may terminate the rental agreement pursuant to ORS 90.620 (1) (Termination by tenant). In addition, the tenant may recover actual damages not less than an amount equal to one month's rent.

Based upon the above, it is my opinion that if you give 24 hour advance notice, you may install the lighting as a necessary safety feature for all residents. The same applies to repair of the lighting. However, here's the conundrum. If you ask for "permission" to install the new lighting, it could be denied, and then you have to go to court for permission. So rather than asking for "permission", I suggest you confer with the affected tenants and work with them on the access, i.e. presume you have the right to do so, and collaborate with the resident on timing, etc. Their main concern will likely be whether it will flood their house with light at night. You need to be sensitive to that issue.

Tips: When giving the 24-hour access (MHCO Form 51), it is sufficient if you give it at least 24 hours in advance covering a particular period of time. I don't recommend just 24 hours; if you know the installer will be out on October 10, don't give the notice on October 9. Give as much advance notice as possible. Secondly, if the installer will take three days to complete the job, you don't have to give 24-hours' notice each day they return. If you understand it will be a three day job, add a couple more for Murphy's law, and then give a notice saying something to the effect that "Commencing on XXX date and continuing until YYY day, ABC company will be at your space (No. ___) between the hours of ______ AM and ______ PM [times must be reasonable - PCQ] to install new safety lighting for the community." And presumably, since you've already addressed tenant concerns, that should suffice, and the advance collaboration will reduce the chance of push-back. Good luck!

As a community manager, you will normally be charged with accepting or rejecting prospective residents. This is one of the most important functions that you will perform as a manager of a manufactured home community. Done properly and effectively, the rental application and screening process will minimize potential problems in landlord - resident relations. If the process is done incorrectly the seeds of future problems will be sown. Every prospective resident should be given sufficient information to make an informed decision about living in a manufactured home community.

When an individual stops by the manufactured home community office inquiring on the possibility of becoming a resident, always give them an application packet. Anyone who is interested in applying should be given the application packet - inconsistency in giving out application packets could lead to cause of action by the resident selling the home in the community or a fair housing violation.

The application packet is your opportunity to sell the prospective resident on your community. Include in the application packet an application and "Minimum Criteria Standards", optional information may include what homes are available in the community, a community newsletter, information on the history of the community, the advantages of living in a manufactured home community etc. You may also want to include at this time a copy of the rental/lease agreement, rules and regulations, rent history, and statement of policy. Remember, you want to sell the prospective resident on your community, but you also want them to make a well informed decision.

Providing a prospective resident's with extensive information regarding your manufactured home community allows the applicant to evaluate for themselves if they qualify. Including what your expectations are in order to qualify and expectations and requirements to maintain residency in the community allows the prospective resident to self qualify.

The overall rental application process should include:

1. Review application to make sure it has been completely filled out.
2. Check to make sure that the applicant has included social security number, driver license information etc.
3. Provide the applicant with a copy of the Statement of Policy (keep a signed copy or receipt for your file), the rent history of the space, Rental Agreement/Lease, Park Rules & Regulations, RV Storage Agreement and Pet Agreement (if applicable), and a Flood Plain Notice. None of these documents should be signed by the community owner or manager until the application process is complete and the prospective resident is accepted.
4. Collect application fee.
5. Provide prospective resident with application fee receipt.
6. Conduct credit, rental and criminal check.
7. Attach copies of credit, rental and criminal check to application
8. If credit, rental and criminal checks are acceptable contact prospective resident.
9. If they are denied and they are purchasing an existing home in the park, send them an application denial form. Also, send a copy to the resident selling the home and one for the tenant's file.

Under current Oregon law you will have not more than 7 days to accept or reject a prospective resident. The 7 days begins on the day of receipt of a complete and accurate written application. The landlord and the prospective resident may agree to a longer time period for the landlord to evaluate the prospective resident's application to address any failure to meet the landlord's screening or admission criteria.

If the existing resident fails to give the required 10 day notice in writing prior to the sale of the home, the landlord may extend the written application process by 10 days. (ORS 90.680)

An application is not complete until the prospective purchaser pays any required applicant screening charge and provides the landlord with all information and documentation required pursuant to ORS 90.510 including any financial data and references. 

Answer. Here is a summary of what you can and cannot do. The statute is found at ORS 90.725.

1. A landlord or a landlord's agent may enter onto a rented space, not including the tenant's manufactured dwelling or floating home or an accessory building or structure, in order to:

• Inspect
• Make necessary or agreed repairs, decorations, alterations or improvements, supply necessary or agreed services, perform agreed yard maintenance, equipment servicing or grounds keeping or exhibit the space to prospective or actual purchasers of the facility, mortgagees, tenants, workers or contractors.

1. The right of access of the landlord or landlord's agent is limited as follows:

• Serving notices
• Emergencies
• Tenant-requested repairs or maintenance
• Per a written yard maintenance agreement that requires the landlord to perform yard maintenance, equipment servicing or grounds-keeping for the space:

1. In all other cases, unless there is an agreement between the landlord and the tenant to the contrary regarding a specific entry, the landlord shall give the tenant at least 24 hours' actual notice (doesn'thave to be in writing, but recommended unless exempted under No. 2, above) of the intent of the landlord to enter and the landlord or landlord's agent may enter only at reasonable times.

1. The landlord or landlord's agent may not enter if the tenant, after receiving the landlord's notice, denies consent to enter. The tenant must assert this denial of consent by giving actual notice of the denial to the landlord or the landlord's agent prior to, or at the time of, the attempt by the landlord or landlord's agent to enter.

1. A landlord shall not abuse the right of access or use it to harass the tenant. A tenant shall not unreasonably withhold consent from the landlord to enter.

1. A landlord has no other right of access except:

• Pursuant to court order;
• As permitted by ORS 90.410 (2) (Waiver of termination of tenancy);
• As permitted under ORS 90.539 (Entry to read submeter); or
• When the tenant has abandoned or relinquished the premises.

1. If the tenant refuses to allow lawful access, the landlord may obtain injunctive relief to compel access or may terminate the rental agreement pursuant to ORS 90.630 (1) and take possession in the manner provided in ORS 105.105 to 105.168 (Oregon eviction statutes). In addition, the landlord may recover actual damages.

1. If the landlord makes an unlawful entry or a lawful entry in an unreasonable manner or makes repeated demands for entry otherwise lawful but that have the effect of unreasonably harassing the tenant, the tenant may obtain injunctive relief to prevent the reoccurrence of the conduct or may terminate the rental agreement pursuant to ORS 90.620 (1) (Termination by tenant). In addition, the tenant may recover actual damages not less than an amount equal to one month's rent.

As a community manager, you will normally be charged with accepting or rejecting prospective residents. This is one of the most important functions that you will perform as a manager of a manufactured home community. Done properly and effectively, the rental application and screening process will minimize potential problems in landlord - resident relations. If the process is done incorrectly the seeds of future problems will be sown. Every prospective resident should be given sufficient information to make an informed decision about living in a manufactured home community.

When an individual stops by the manufactured home community office inquiring on the possibility of becoming a resident, always give them an application packet. Anyone who is interested in applying should be given the application packet - inconsistency in giving out application packets could lead to cause of action by the resident selling the home in the community or a fair housing violation.

The application packet is your opportunity to sell the prospective resident on your community. Include in the application packet an application and "Minimum Criteria Standards", optional information may include what homes are available in the community, a community newsletter, information on the history of the community, the advantages of living in a manufactured home community etc. You may also want to include at this time a copy of the rental/lease agreement, rules and regulations, rent history, and statement of policy. Remember, you want to sell the prospective resident on your community, but you also want them to make a well informed decision.

Providing a prospective resident's with extensive information regarding your manufactured home community allows the applicant to evaluate for themselves if they qualify. Including what your expectations are in order to qualify and expectations and requirements to maintain residency in the community allows the prospective resident to self qualify.

Rental Application Process

The overall rental application process should include:

1. Review application to make sure it has been completely filled out.
2. Check to make sure that the applicant has included social security number, driver license information etc.
3. Provide the applicant with a copy of the Statement of Policy (keep a signed copy or receipt for your file), the rent history of the space, Rental Agreement/Lease, Park Rules & Regulations, RV Storage Agreement and Pet Agreement (if applicable), and a Flood Plain Notice. None of these documents should be signed by the community owner or manager until the application process is complete and the prospective resident is accepted.
4. Collect application fee.
5. Provide prospective resident with application fee receipt.
6. Conduct credit, rental and criminal check.
7. Attach copies of credit, rental and criminal check to application
8. If credit, rental and criminal checks are acceptable contact prospective resident.
9. If they are denied and they are purchasing an existing home in the park, send them an application denial form. Also, send a copy to the resident selling the home and one for the tenant's file.

Under current Oregon law you will have not more than 7 days to accept or reject a prospective resident. The 7 days begins on the day of receipt of a complete and accurate written application. The landlord and the prospective resident may agree to a longer time period for the landlord to evaluate the prospective resident's application to address any failure to meet the landlord's screening or admission criteria.

If the existing resident fails to give the required 10 day notice in writing prior to the sale of the home, the landlord may extend the written application process by 10 days. (ORS 90.680)

An application is not complete until the prospective purchaser pays any required applicant screening charge and provides the landlord with all information and documentation required pursuant to ORS 90.510 including any financial data and references. 

Answer: Yes, you can close the restroom and the laundry facility, but you will need to jump through a few legal hoops to do it.

Under Oregon law, a landlord cannot unilaterally make a change if it "works a substantial modification of the bargain" unless the RV tenant consents in writing. (Note: This differs from the rule change notice and voting procedure for mobile home tenants. That procedure does not apply to RV tenants.)

While you could try getting the written consent of all of your RV tenants, I doubt very much that they would agree to it. Most tenants are not willing to voluntarily give up services provided as part of their rent.

My recommendation has always been to issue either 30-day or 60-day no-cause tenancy termination notices to all RV tenants, coupled with an offer to sign a new rental agreement. The new rental agreement would include a provision specifying that the park will no longer provide a public restroom or laundry. If tenants choose to stay, they would need to sign the new agreement agreeing to the change. If not, they would need to vacate the park or face an eviction action.
Assuming your RV tenants are on a month-to-month rental agreement, a 30-day notice could be issued to any RV tenant who has been a tenant for less than a year. If the tenant has been in the park for a year or longer, it would require a 60-day notice. (Although I would recommend the same 60-day timeline for all RV tenants to avoid any claims of unfairness.)

Mark L. Busch, P.C.
Attorney at Law
Cornell West, Suite 200
1500 NW Bethany Blvd.
Beaverton, Oregon 97006

Ph: 503-597-1309
Fax: 503-430-7593
Web: www.marklbusch.com
Email: mark@marklbusch.com