danemayer
Well-known member
Interesting commentary. http://rvdailyreport.com/opinion/opinion-hud-action-could-eliminate-full-time-rving/
Commentary on Housing and Urban Development rules affecting RVs
- Thread starter danemayer
- Start date
B
BouseBill
Guest
It's all about control. The control of an out-of-control government over it's people. The government does not like NOT knowing where to you are at any given time. The ability to get up and move at any time.....why......why...why YOU can't do that, we DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'LL BE!!
Think about that!!
Think about that!!
EPaulikonis
Well-known member
If you full-time in a non-self propelled RV (fifth wheel or TT), you might want to comment at www.regulations.gov. Search for HUD-2016-0013-0001 to access the language of the proposed and to submit your comments.
Language includes new build standard NFPA 1192-15, Standard for Recreational Vehicles or ANSI A119.5-15, Recreational Park Trailer Standard, to be used by RV manufacturers along with requirement to post a notice inside RVs for sale 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."
Language includes new build standard NFPA 1192-15, Standard for Recreational Vehicles or ANSI A119.5-15, Recreational Park Trailer Standard, to be used by RV manufacturers along with requirement to post a notice inside RVs for sale 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."
BLHFUN
Well-known member
I vote for number 8 - Not a full timer yet - But when I decide, it should be my decision.
* - Or, my favorite, people who think it’s really nobody’s @#$%& business where they chose to live or how they chose to work.
Last edited by a moderator:
HornedToad
Well-known member
I'm not going to let a sticker on the door of my RV dictate how I use it... If it comes down to the government "trying" to tell me where or how to live, then I've got a bigger problem than if it's in an RV.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Diamondjim
Well-known member
I'm with you!
It's called incrementalism and the folks who think they know better how we should live our lives will keep chipping away at our freedoms. .....and the elites wonder why Trump has such a following! GET off our backs and let US enjoy the life we've chosen to live! !!!
Sent from my LGL41C using Tapatalk
I tend to be an article skimmer, but my takeaway was that the RV industry is actually welcoming the clarification, having only being required to place a $0.01 piece of paper on the kitchen counter stating that their initial intention of building an RV is that you will use it as an RV. If that use happens to take place 365 days a year, so be it. That's your decision. This is just preventing the RV industry from having to build RVs to HUD fixed-home standards. I tried to find the referenced ANSI standard, but only came up with more various articles and opinions on the matter instead of the actual standard.
As for difficulty in obtaining loans on an RV as a full-timer, I can say that we've done that twice now with ease. You just have to find the right financial institution. Alliant Credit Union was more than happy to loan us money to purchase our current rig and the previous one. We just had to put a year's worth of insurance cost in escrow in an interest-bearing savings account with them. Their rates are reasonable, as well (better than an RV loan from my own credit union).
As for difficulty in obtaining loans on an RV as a full-timer, I can say that we've done that twice now with ease. You just have to find the right financial institution. Alliant Credit Union was more than happy to loan us money to purchase our current rig and the previous one. We just had to put a year's worth of insurance cost in escrow in an interest-bearing savings account with them. Their rates are reasonable, as well (better than an RV loan from my own credit union).
EPaulikonis
Well-known member
The proposed revision by HUD was just submitted as an open action on 9 Feb 16.
This issue is deeper than a cheap piece of paper on the counter during sale. Including language about standards to build is fine. Maybe we get a better product, but I've never seen where a gov't regulation improves the quality without significantly increasing the retail price of a product.
I do believe the language about occupancy in an RV as a fulltime dwelling is alarming for anyone who is, or who has ever thought about fulltime RV living. HUD's legislature will become a launch platform for the banking, insurance, and financial industries and I'm sure the state and local law makers will pile on top of the HUD Federal Regulation in short order. I disagree with HUD adding language about occupancy in an RV while working to distinguish the difference between manufactured homes and RVs. This is a fight over building standards, not occupancy.
This issue is deeper than a cheap piece of paper on the counter during sale. Including language about standards to build is fine. Maybe we get a better product, but I've never seen where a gov't regulation improves the quality without significantly increasing the retail price of a product.
I do believe the language about occupancy in an RV as a fulltime dwelling is alarming for anyone who is, or who has ever thought about fulltime RV living. HUD's legislature will become a launch platform for the banking, insurance, and financial industries and I'm sure the state and local law makers will pile on top of the HUD Federal Regulation in short order. I disagree with HUD adding language about occupancy in an RV while working to distinguish the difference between manufactured homes and RVs. This is a fight over building standards, not occupancy.
2psnapod2
Texas-South Chapter Leaders-Retired
I think everyone is forgetting the original issue. The manufactured home people were trying to make the RV industry conform to the same rules they have to follow. Primarily in the park model industry. Which makes them more expensive. Since the government has now ruled that RVS are different and then not required to meet the same costly requirements. That cheap piece of paper is the government's way of lettings us that are full-time RVrs know it does not meet those standards. Not a big deal. We already have full time insurance on them. Meaning we pay for medical if something was to happen. Which is the same as a S&B.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
2psnapod2
Texas-South Chapter Leaders-Retired
Here is a new article put out by RV Business News. That explains that this will not effect us really at all. It is business as usual. http://www.rvbusiness.com/2016/02/joint-statement-hud-move-critical-to-industry/
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
danemayer
Well-known member
Hmm....
The cover of the Landmark 365 Brochure has very large type that says:
Not to mention a warranty for full-time use.
danemayer
Well-known member
Sometimes words matter. If you use words to define your product, and those words are in opposition to the HUD exception for RVs, perhaps HUD (or someone else) would argue that your product is not covered by the RV exception. To make their case, all they have to do is hold up the brochure and the warranty statement.
Similar threads
- Locked
