| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| HUD’s Proposed RV Rule Causes an Uproar as RV Sales Hit 39-Year High; sounds to me like big business trying to squash little business ... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 9 2016, 08:34 AM (398 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Apr 9 2016, 08:34 AM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
(CNSNews.com) – In February, as sales of recreational vehicles (RVs) hit a 39-year high with 35,929 units sold, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published a proposed rule in The Federal Register to revise the definition of an RV as “designed only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for permanent occupancy.” The proposal garnered praise from the RV industry, which has been pushing for clarification of the regulations for the past decade. But it has angered thousands of RV and tiny house on wheels (THOWs) enthusiasts. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/huds-proposed-rv-rule-causes-uproar-sales-hit-39-year-high |
|
|
| Deleted User | Apr 9 2016, 08:35 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
This looks to me like the real reason for this: "RV owners currently may reside in their RVs full-time and seasonally. This is a matter between the RV owner, local housing authorities, and other local and state officials...who are in the best position to address the regulation of the use of RVs," the Escapees RV Club said in a letter to HUD. The proposed rule "takes HUD away from the regulation of housing and into the regulation of vehicles outside of HUD's authority....the unintended, but potentially substantial, damaging effect of HUD's language is a crippling limitation on the use of RVs," the letter added. HUD's proposal “threatens ‘full-time RVers’ and further stymies those seeking to build their tiny house as a street legal home,” according to Timber Trails - which is seeking the “legitimization and legalization” of THOWs - characterizing it as “a punch-in-the-gut from big business to the bootstrapping tiny house industry.” |
|
|
| BuckFan | Apr 9 2016, 09:57 AM Post #3 |
|
Reading the article, the opponents want to make this about size but the real issue is building standards. What HUD has said is that RV are not permanent homes and do not need to meet building standards required for permanent homes. This makes it easier (and cheaper) on the industry to build RV's. HUD wants it made clear to consumers that they are buying an RV with RV materials and not to expect the same level of fire prevention, etc. The problem is that this has an impact on what can be used as a home under local regulations. I suspect it will also have tax and loan implications for the RV purchaser using it as their primary residence. |
![]() |
|
| Robert Stout | Apr 9 2016, 04:05 PM Post #4 |
|
Old RVs could be the solution to homelessness.............
|
| Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid | |
![]() |
|
| clone | Apr 9 2016, 05:13 PM Post #5 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Who's your Nanny.....? |
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic » |






8:27 PM Jul 10