Answer: Your question raises several issues worthy of discussion. First, the fact that the son is in the park and you didn'tknow he was a convicted sex offender, tells me that the park should beef up its rules to require all persons 18 years and over undergo a criminal background check.
Answer. This is not an issue under ORS 90.632, which relates to damage and deterioration of the home.
Answer. I'm confused. May I assume the grandmother or her sister are at least 55 years old? If so, they qualify both as to the requirement that there be at least one occupant 55+, and as to the second person requirement. That should be the end of the age issue.
Answer. There are several that come into play:
Answer. I believe that what you want to do is possible; you want to verify with your own legal counsel.
Answer. Let's brush up on Oregon's hazard tree law as it relates to landlord-tenant responsibilities:
Answer. I remember writing this provision several years ago, and it has survived the test of time - in other words - to my knowledge it has never been set aside or otherwise ruled illegal or unconscionable by any Oregon courts.
Evictions.
Answer: That is a good question. First, to be clear for our readers, a "security agreement" is any agreement that serves as "security" on the property. For example, a trust deed is recorded on real property, and secures the promissory note. If the note is not paid, the holder can turn to the security, and sell it to satisfy the unpaid indebtedness.
Answer. There is no such form. Perhaps there should be. But first, let's address some threshold issues, such as: