DEFINITION
The model provides that rent cannot be increased at the time of a change in occupancy. Most often this would involve an in-place transfer of the mobilehome when it is sold. This type of protection is called "vacancy control.”
FOCUS OF LITIGATION
The issue of "vacancy control" has been a focal point of much litigation. This is different from the issue of whether rent control itself is constitutional (which has already been decided, as mentioned). At the risk of becoming somewhat technical, it is important to understand where this issue fits into the overall rent control scheme, since the adoption of vacancy control is a crucial element for most homeowners to obtain.
MOBILE HOME RESIDENCY LAW IMPACTS

PARK OWNER ARGUMENT
Park owners have used the
combined effect of these state law provisions and local rent control to establish a novel unconstitutional taking argument. This is
an issue known as "vacancy control," which prevents a park owner from
raising rents when a rental
space is vacated and a new tenant takes possession. In other words, the new tenant/buyer steps into the shoes of the previous
tenant/seller and receives
the benefit of the same rental restrictions. Park owners have argued that this gives the tenants the ability to "monetize"
this right by selling their on-site mobilehomes
for a higher price (they call it a “premium”). Consequently, they allege a
transfer of the value of the
underlying land from the landlord to the tenant has occurred which constitutes
an unconstitutional
taking.
Source: The GSMOL Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance Handbook, Second Edition: Guidelines for Drafting and Enacting a Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization Ordinance.
Prepared by: Bruce
Stanton, Esq., Corporate Counsel
Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at freedigitalphotos.net
santa Barbara does not have vacancy control. just as the park owners argues; it applies to the mobile home owners as well. there has to be some fair vacancy control as the home owners equity is wiped out.
ReplyDelete