HUD Regulations...Tiny Houses vs. RV Fulltimers

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Jon in AZ

Wondering if maybe, just maybe, we could return to the original point of this thread as it relates to RVs, particularly all-molded towables…

So I have a question, several actually.

What, exactly, is the difference between a tiny house and an RV? If I were to build my own trailer, what would determine whether it is classed as a tiny house or an RV? Tiny houses will now have to meet one of two residential codes. What codes do RVs have to meet? Who verifies compliance?

I'm wondering because the RVIA seems to be deeply involved in this issue on the RV side. I have often noticed that many RVs have a small emblem on them indicating the manufacturer is a member. From what I have read, I take it that the RVIA, among other things, publishes a set of standards or codes for RV construction. I also noticed that Oliver advertises itself as an RVIA member. Scamp is not, as far as I can tell (no emblem or indication in its advertising).

Scamp considered buying RVIA stickers, but soon discovered that the cost per unit was prohibitive, as much as 5% of the purchase price.
Also note that the subscription does not include inspection for each trailer.

When the Oliver rep pointed to his sticker with pride, I offered to go to a nearby RV salvage yard and get as many stickers as he wished, all from trailers only a few years old. One thing I noticed was that many of the emblems were deteriorated as well!

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Carol H

So how (& who) sets your taxes for such items, if not based on the value of your property?


.

Not to worry, everything is either taxed or against the law, some are even both!

[Henry Smith]

Originally Posted by Carol H

The funny thing about the topic of local governments is people love to criticize them but in these parts the voter turnout is extremely low for local government elections....Here they hold open houses at the local hall trying to engage the community on various issues, often very few people bother to show up. Again go figure.

There's no great mystery there, Carol. The answer is that people want to be left alone. The members of the permanent political classes (thank you Sarah Palin), with their very high salaries, lifetime job security, and gold-plated pensions, always say "if you don't like it then get involved." But people don't want to have to "get involved," they want to be left alone.

Owning and living in a fiberglass trailer is one defensive strategy. Another is to live in a place where there is very little government (in my area in New Hampshire, there are no zoning and no building codes, and the people there like it that way). Yet such strategies are difficult (there's a reason I also live in Florida). People shouldn't have to work hard or endure living hard to escape the depredations of "politics as usual".

So for all of the above reasons, I oppose bureaucrats trying to bring tiny homes under their power and control (so they can be taxed more!). I'd like to see the tiny homes get just as much protection from the political pirates as RV people have. After all, living in a travel trailer is hard, with many deprivations. The same is true of living in tiny houses on wheels.

[Jon in AZ]

Originally Posted by floyd

Scamp considered buying RVIA stickers, but soon discovered that the cost per unit was prohibitive, as much as 5% of the purchase price.
Also note that the subscription does not include inspection for each trailer.

When the Oliver rep pointed to his sticker with pride, I offered to go to a nearby RV salvage yard and get as many stickers as he wished, all from trailers only a few years old. One thing I noticed was that many of the emblems were deteriorated as well!

Okay. It's expensive to be an RVIA member. It may be more marketing than substance. But what about the larger question of standards? Does RVIA publish standards? Are they widely accepted and followed by RV makers, independent of whether they are members or not? Or is buying an RV purely a situation of caveat emptor?

[Uplander]

Jon in AZ, Hope this thread gets back to the original subject and stops this endless dribble about government, taxes and infrastructure etc...nothing to go with RVing.

The RVIA does not publish standards but does get involved in the building codes for RVs and keeps them separate from the building codes imposed on housing.

It is simple...either it is a RV or it is a house.
HUD re-entered the picture as the Tiny House movement tried to use RV building codes for their units. The tried to be considered a RV based on their small square footage and the fact that the housing they created was built on wheels.
The fact remains that the Tiny Hoses were in fact houses and designed as permanent housing and not recreational vehicles....the key words here are "recreational" and "permanent housing". HUD made it clear small (tiny) square footage alone does not include tiny houses in the RV class...wheels or not!!!
There was also a "real property tax avoidance component" involved in the issue.

The taxation issue seems to have turned this thread into a discussion of government and taxation and away from Fulltimers in RVs.

It is time to end this quagmire of exchanges on local zoning laws and taxes.
Time to get back to RVs and Fulltimers following the sun in real RVs....free (for now at least) from more government involvement thanks to the agreement between HUD and the RVIA.

Happy Camping.

[Jon in AZ]

Originally Posted by Uplander

...real RVs[emphasis added]....free (for now at least) from more government involvement thanks to the agreement between HUD and the RVIA.

So how, exactly, do the new regulations draw the line? Seems to me that's the critical point. Whether it's mathematics, science, or governance, careful definitions are the foundation on which all else is built. This whole issue came about because tiny house folks were exploiting a grey area in previous definitions.

For the record, I am sympathetic to the tiny house movement. The idea that one needs XXXX square feet to be safe, comfortable, and socially responsible flies in the face of history, the rest of the world, environmental stewardship, and common sense. It parallels the micro-apartment movement in ultra-high-rent cities like NYC and SF. Living with less is good, as molded fiberglass RVs demonstrate in a different way.

[floyd]

Many years ago there was a thing called a "Mother-in-Law" house, which was a small home built in a person's back yard to give privacy,proximity, security and dignity to a parent who should not otherwise live alone.
These are largely gone now, along with corner grocery stores, due to zoning rules.

When I see these "Tiny Houses" I think of how they could serve that purpose once again offering peace of mind to families without suffering the disruption and indignity of having an elderly parent actually move in with them.

We had a couple of these backyard accommodations and corner groceries on our street growing up and I think they enhanced the value of the neighborhood... but I was too young to care about what they did to property values,guess I still am.

[Henry Smith]

Originally Posted by Jon in AZ

The idea that one needs XXXX square feet to be safe, comfortable, and socially responsible flies in the face of history, the rest of the world, environmental stewardship, and common sense. It parallels the micro-apartment movement in untra-high-rent cities like NYC and SF. Living with less is good, as molded fiberglass RVs demonstrate in a different way.

All true! I agree. But more taxes are always needed by all levels of government, and the tiny house movement is growing. If they're allowed to escape property taxes, it could be terrible. Who knows what might happen.

Come to think of it...isn't it unfair that us RV people should be able to live largely free of taxes? Shouldn't we also be included for tax purposes if tiny homes are? I mean, many RV's have more square footage under the roof than some tiny homes. Right?

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Henry Smith

All true! I agree. But more taxes are always needed by all levels of government, and the tiny house movement is growing. If they're allowed to escape property taxes, it could be terrible. Who knows what might happen.

[Patxx]

In my over taxed state, I already pay property tax on my Casita so I assume someone with a tiny house would also.

As far as the other part of the discussion, If i move into an area that has all these rules about what you can and not do with you property, It was my responsibility to find out about these rules before moving and to live with them.
If I live out in a rural area and people start moving in around me and want to add all these rules and such, well they knew what my place was before they moved there. They should accept that and live with it. If I want to park a travel trailer in my carport or a tractor in my pole barn that is my business.
They should live with it or move.

[Jon in AZ]

Originally Posted by Henry Smith

All true! I agree. But more taxes are always needed by all levels of government, and the tiny house movement is growing. If they're allowed to escape property taxes, it could be terrible. Who knows what might happen.

Come to think of it...isn't it unfair that us RV people should be able to live largely free of taxes? Shouldn't we also be included for tax purposes if tiny homes are? I mean, many RV's have more square footage under the roof than some tiny homes. Right?

Full-time RVers do pay taxes, including property taxes in many cases. It's included in the space rent at a private park.

As to your other point, government bodies are looking to increase revenues, true. But your neighbors are looking for fairness. Separate issues. In this case both interests align against the tiny house movement. Mother-in-law apartments and corner grocery stores, where permitted, are included in the property tax assessment.

[Glenn Baglo]

In Vancouver those mother-in-law apartments are called "lane-way houses" and there is currently a backlog of 700 applications to build. They are not cheap. Construction of one generally costs about $350,000.
You will not be allowed to build it out of corrugated tin or plant one of those 'tiny houses' that don't follow building codes ( just because you stuck wheels under it ).

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Jon in AZ

Okay. It's expensive to be an RVIA member. It may be more marketing than substance. But what about the larger question of standards? Does RVIA publish standards? Are they widely accepted and followed by RV makers, independent of whether they are members or not? Or is buying an RV purely a situation of caveat emptor?

I currently have a trailer in the driveway that has a RVIA sticker on it and despite having been out in the sun in Southern California for 12 years its VERY readable and looks like it could have been put on yesterday and it states the manufacture of the trailer certifies the trailer was manufacture to meet ANSI standard XXX.X

RVIA is basically a Professional organization that RV manufactures can choose to belong to.... just as you will find similar organization for many professions: - homebuilders, accountants, plumbers, electricians, etc In the case of some professions its not actually optional to belong to your professional organization - its mandated. The goal of such orginizations is to keep their membership up to date as to the current best practices and ANSI standards and members are expected to follow those standards. Like all professions there will be members who choose not to follow the organizations best practises policies - until they get caught!

I can tell you that the process of importing a trailer made in the USA that is under 16 years of age was made pretty easy due to that little sticker Easier than it was to import another US built trailer that was also less than 16 years of age at the time I imported it but it did not have a RIVA sticker on it showing it was compliant with the ANSI standards in place at the time of manufacturing.

As a consumer purchasing a new to you trailer, ask yourself which would make you feel more comfortable when buying a new trailer A) a trailer that states right on it that it conforms to the ANSI standard XXX or B ) One that was built by a party who decided they did not need anyone to tell them how to do it right.

Like every professional organization RIVA does not absolutely guarantee their membership actually did build every trailer to the ANSI standard set but it does provide the consumer with a bit more hope in that regard than one might have when purchasing from a manufacture who chooses not to belong to their professional organization.

On the other hand, I am aware that we do have at least one fibreglass trailer manufacture who does not actually belong to RIVA but who does keep up on the RV ANSI standards.

[vintageracer]

RVIA (RVIA.org) is to the RV industry what SEMA (SEMA.ORG) is to the aftermarket automotive industry. A trade association that promotes in this case the RV industry, RV manufacturer's, re-seller's, dealer, parts vendors and anyone else associated with the RV industry.

Does RVIA have an agenda? Absolutely! RVIA is no different than any other trade group, PAC or lobbyist. Is RVIA good for the RV industry? That depends on your point of view. I believe they are.

Just look at the amount of posts and subjects posted here on this one fiberglass trailer site everyday. How many of those same posters have a ANY clue what's going on in DC or in local their local state legislatures and city councils concerning legislation that might adversely effect their use, ownership, storage, safety requirement or any other bit of what some consider foolish laws and restrictions proposed by the very idiots WE ourselves have elected to represent us? 1 or none at a maximum!

As has been noted by many above there are LOT'S of things that can effect our ownership, use, storage, taxation, differentiation of trailer types and general enjoyment of our RV. Without some type of watchdog group dedicated to the RV industry many of the freedom's we enjoy or dispise concerning our use, ownership, safety and construction of our own RV can be greatly effected. It this time of increased government intrusion into our live's "For Our Own Good" I for one am glad RVIA, SEMA and other organizations representing industries and causes that people are passionate about exist.

The 'Tiny House" will continue to grow as this becomes more and more a local issue as many in "Big Cities" try convince us of the need for more affordable (READ SUBSIDIZED) housing in these big cities. My own Mayor just "Pledged" $10MM from the cities Reserve Fund last week to this very issue yet SHE has NO right whatsoever to spend this money on this issue. That's what the city council does. She says "Affordable Housing" is GOOD for Nashville and so it shall be all the while AVOIDING this single biggest issue facing our city and many others across the nation which is transportation the movement of people in and out of the 5 county Metro Nashville area. Which one these issues makes more political hay for her?

Do I agree with EVERYTHING RVIA or SEMA does on my behalf for the RV & automotvie aftermarket industry? NO and neither does anyone else. However I AM glad they are working on my behalf as the RV & and Automotive Aftermarket industry are MUCH better because of their actions.

Instead of complaining why not see what RVIA is all about at RVIA.org and then YOU decide. Like what they do? Why not join the organization that helps the RV industry is so many ways. Don't like em? Then fight em all the way. That's what make our country and way of life the envy of the world. Most folks across the globe are just trying to "Scratch A Living" yet in the Good Ole USA we have leisure time, money and ability to "Enjoy the RV Lifestyle".

Ain't AMERICA GREAT?????

[Henry Smith]

Originally Posted by Patxx

If i move into an area that has all these rules about what you can and not do with you property, It was my responsibility to find out about these rules before moving and to live with them. If I live out in a rural area and people start moving in around me and want to add all these rules and such, well they knew what my place was before they moved there. They should accept that and live with it. If I want to park a travel trailer in my carport or a tractor in my pole barn that is my business. They should live with it or move.

Well spoken. That's why I'd never move into a subdivision or neighborhood with a homeowners' association that had the power to force compliance with their petty rules. One other thing too: When people do start moving into your neighborhood and start demanding rules and regulations be put in place to suit them, FIGHT IT. Such people are like termites...they never, ever stop eating away at your right to live the way you want to.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

In Vancouver those mother-in-law apartments are called "lane-way houses" and there is currently a backlog of 700 applications to build. .

In North Vancouver they are often called "Carriage Houses"

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Carol H

I can tell you that the process of importing a trailer made in the USA that is under 16 years of age was made pretty easy due to that little sticker Easier than it was to import another US built trailer that was also less than 16 years of age at the time I imported it but it did not have a RIVA sticker on it showing it was compliant with the ANSI standards in place at the time of manufacturing.

As a consumer purchasing a new to you trailer, ask yourself which would make you feel more comfortable when buying a new trailer A) a trailer that states right on it that it conforms to the ANSI standard XXX or B ) One that was built by a party who decided they did not need anyone to tell them how to do it right.

So what if you just buy the sticker? Or is there paperwork needed to back it up?
I asked myself that question about comfort in buying a new trailer, looked at the product myself, interviewed the builder, and bought a Scamp. Then spent the extra $500 on a nice trip to Florida!
BTW, My Scamp will be 12Years old in about eight weeks and the spot where the sticker would be is still shiny and easier to wax than the sticker. As for the trailer, it is safe and sound and meets all relevant standards.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by floyd

So what if you just buy the sticker? Or is there paperwork needed to back it up?
I asked myself that question about comfort in buying a new trailer, looked at the product myself, interviewed the builder, and bought a Scamp. Then spent the extra $500 on a nice trip to Florida!
BTW, My Scamp will be 12Years old in about eight weeks and the spot where the sticker would be is still shiny and easier to wax than the sticker. As for the trailer, it is safe and sound and meets all relevant standards.

:lout Well Floyd like all things in life one could always try it. But in this case I would first recommend reading up on the penalties for being untruthful at a border crossing We would really miss you around here!!!

Its been my experience that at the border there is usually only one party on duty at any time who has been trained to do the trailer imports so one runs the risk that the party you are dealing with is very familiar with which trailers they can expect to see a RIVA sticker on and which ones they will not.

You would be very surprised as just how many border staff also happen to be fibreglass trailer fans and they do lurk here! LOL Not to mention that RIVA has an on line data base the border can use to look up which manufactures belong to RIVA an which do not. Will they check? Hard to say but I can tell you that one of the other requirements of importing is to have a letter from the trailers manufacture stating the trailer has no outstanding recalls against it. I had such a letter - yet the party I dealt with at the border still went on line to a data base and called up recall history for the trailer to be sure the manufactures letter was factual. I know as I was standing there when they did it.

I like you love my Scamp and have few concerns with it from a safety stand point as it has stood the test of time. It would not surprise me one bit if although not RIVA members Scamp is following the ANSA standards although maybe not all of them. As I said I know of at least one other popular fibreglass trailer manufacture that I am pretty sure is as well but they do not belong to RIVA & if I had to guess the reason for it, is it is due to their being a fairly new manufacture the cost is/was prohibitive. Bigfoot prior to running into financial issues and temp closing did belong to RIVA but if you look now they do not appear on the RIVA website as being members..... but again I suspect they are still well versed on the ANSA standards. In the case of Bigfoot my guess would be its most probable due to finances they are no longer a RIVA member. They seem to be making a go of it again so perhaps they will be a RIVA member again in the not to distant future.

On the other hand we both know in recent times here that we have seen some pretty unsafe build practise by new manufactures in the fibreglass trailer biz.

One example of that was a new trailer manufacture who for what ever reason did not even see fit to read the axle manufactures installation instructions regarding clearances or bother to read the battery manufactures install instructions regarding appropriate venting on their batteries. Pretty basic stuff. In both cases we had members here who where put at a fairly high risk of injury or death due to both those issues. In one case one member was very very fortunate to have had no harm done to a child who was sleeping on top of a battery compartment fire. Do I think that manufacture ever even bothered to read the ANSA standard on anything he did on that trailer? Do I suspect there is a high likelihood that trailer had other very unsafe build issues? Not normally a betting type but I would be willing to put a few dollars down on that one! :lout

[vintageracer]

ANSI standards for those who love technical reading!

ANSI-American National Standards Institute

[Jon in AZ]

Thanks, Mike, Carol, and Floyd for the education about RVIA and ANSI. I was unaware of the extent to which the RV industry is self-regulating. Caveat emptor, indeed.

I'm still curious how HUD defined each to make a clear distinction... but not enough to wade through pages of government-ese to read the original documents.