Archive

Posts Tagged ‘CEO’

Problems with Quote from Richard Jennison, MHI’s CEO in StatePoint Advertorials

September 16th, 2016 No comments

As usual, I have been perusing the media sites, informational resources and doing online searches on news regarding Manufactured and Modular Housing.

In doing, so I have come across articles supported by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) that have taken me aback.  These articles include quotes from MHI CEO Richard Jennison.  I couldn’t help but to reread these articles several times, as I couldn’t believe what I was reading would get published by a national association like MHI.

One would think the legal eyes would be on these advertorials published via StatePoint.  They need eyes like hawks on a field mouse to verify and validate appropriate and accurate content regarding quotes and implications.  When promotional articles are wordsmithed correctly, they protect the association and its membership from potential individual or class action suits.

As a specific example, MHI CEO Richard Jennison declared boldly that HUD Code manufactured homes placed in land lease communities appreciate just like site built homes.

Quoting from one of those MHI-Jennison (StatePoint) article, Furthermore, they (referring to HUD Code manufactured homes in a land lease community) appreciate in value, just like site built homes.”

Umm, are you kidding me?

I was blown back by this comment from countless perspectives.  The first of which is NEVER violate the second GOLDEN RULE of real estate.

Real Estate Brokers and Agents are taught the second GOLDEN RULE of real estate in Real Estate 101, that after Location, Location, Location, you never, NEVER, EVER discuss or guarantee future value of a property.  Having taught real estate 101 and 301 at the community college level – often instructing those holding a real estate license – I assure you my information is accurate.

Guaranteeing appreciation is a quick, sure way of opening yourself up to a gigantic law suit that can bury you and your firm; or in this case, an association making such a problematic assertion.

For the CEO of a national association to put that in writing is appalling. Especially so, after they spent time convincing the GSEs to use Blue Book valuation in early 2016 when assessing or appraising MH in an MHC!

guaranteeingappreciationmanufacturedhometitusdarepostedindustryvoicesmhpronews

Quote from Titus Dare – graphic credit, by MHProNews.

Now the article with Jennison’s comment was presumably released from the highest level of MHI.

Where’s the disconnect?  Who approved this?  Were any of the legal eagles reading this carefully to see the potential for future legal issues for both the association and just about everyone associated with making a sale to a consumer placing their new home in an MHC?

If just one person relies on that Richard Jennison statement and buys a manufactured home, sites it in an MHC, and loses money or doesn’t feel their appreciation rate matches that of their brick and mortar friend who owns a home in the same zip code, what do you think that consumer is going to do?

They are going to hit the internet after work and research their subject material, to determine why they were told their appreciation would be the same – and then they may well run across resources that tell them why there home is not gaining value as they were led to believe.  They are going to put the pieces together. That can lead to major problems for many in the MH industry.

They may even call MHI, their state association or…their attorney.

That consumer is going to learn that MH home prices are determined by Blue Book values, as MHI pushed to have that implemented in discussions with the GSEs. Anybody, even the least sophisticated consumer, knows from their car buying and selling experience that Blue Book values are based on depreciation.

There are so many factors that go into appreciation and depreciation, as real estate and many MH industry professionals know. There is the local and national economy. Location, including the impact of factors like the school district.

How about the quality level of the subject manufactured home, and how it is being care for – or not – by its owner? How about the foundation and installation system under the home? How is the community managed and maintained?

But all those facts and qualifiers about manufactured – or other homes – is missing in this highly irregular line, again, quoting Jennison – “Furthermore, they appreciate in value, just like site built homes.”

Where are Jennison’s and MHI’s qualifiers for all of these issues in that StatePoint advertorial, and so many more that are needed?

Before writing this column, I sent the link to that MHI/StatePoint article to some legal minds, and asked them for their input on manufactured home appreciation being automatic in a land lease community.

The return calls included a voice laughing on the other end, asking me to please distribute their business cards to those consumers who had bought homes under the pretense of the comment made by the CEO of the national association.

This advertorial approach was a mix of good, bad, inaccurate and deceptive marketing on behalf of a national manufactured housing association. I’ve focused on the bad, because that is where the problems will come from.

You would never see the NAHB or another national trade associations blurt out such problematic nonsense. ##

(Editor’s Note: headline was provided by MHProNews. This column nor the cover message directly referenced the Masthead column linked here, but it is on the same topic.)

titusdareeagleonefinancialposteddailybusinessnews-mhpronewsTitus T. Dare
SVP – Real Estate Development & Construction
Eagle One Financial

 

UMH President and CEO, Sam Landy on Rent Control, Manufactured Home Communities

September 14th, 2016 No comments

Tony, I have a long history with rent control and have thoroughly studied the issue.

If you do a manufactured home community with all rental units, I suspect you will never have to deal with rent control.

When a resident makes an investment in their house – which with modern manufactured homes could now be over $100,000 – the possibility exists that some community owner will raise rents in a inequitable fashion. When that happens, the home-owning residents will scream for rent control. Once rent control is adopted, it is a nightmare for the landlord and it is costly for the municipality.

The fact is if we raise our rents too high we will have no sales and no occupancy.

No reasonable landlord would do such a thing.

Our rents have to make economic sense or we have no business.

Therefore, in the long term, there is never a need for rent control.

samlandyonrentcontrolmanufacturedhomecommunitiesakamobilehomeparkssic-postedindustryvoicesmhpronews

Graphic credit, MHProNews.

In the short term, however, a single landlord can create a bad situation for hundreds of home-owning residents by raising rents in excess of market rent. The market will force the landlord to lower rent over time, but many residents may object strongly before that happens.

Once rent control is adopted, politicians will – by the tenants votes – be giving the landlord’s property to the tenants. It happens all the time.

UMH never raises rents more than 4% or CPI. By doing so, the municipality understands we are treating our residents fairly.

UMH would not buy a rent controlled community and believes all community owners should work with residents to avoid rent control.

One way to work with residents is increase rents for existing residents in a smaller amount than for new residents. That reduces the opposition to rent increases. ##

Sam

samlandy-umh-ceopresidentjd_credit-linkedi-posted-industryvoicesmanufacturedhousingindustrypronews-mhpronewsSam Landy, Esq.
President and CEO
UMH Properties, Inc.

(Editor’s note: this letter to the editor came in response to the Daily Business News article by guest writer, Joe Dyton, linked here. Headlines are routinely supplied by MHProNews, as was the case in this Op-Ed with Mr. Landy.)

To read an in-depth interview, A Cup of Coffee with…Sam Landy, click here.

kevin-clayton-l-ryan-howerton-21st-sam-landy-umh-chris-lindsey-umh-charley-lott-fleetwood-manufactured-home-living-news-2

L-R _Kevin Clayton – Clayton Homes, Ryan Howertown – 21st Mortgage, Sam Landy – UMH Properties, Chris Lindsey – UMH Properties, Charley Lott – Fleetwood Homes (Cavco). Photo from industry event by MHProNews.

 

Discrimination, Zoning and Disparate Impact on Manufactured Homes, Owners, Prospects

August 25th, 2016 No comments

The discriminatory exclusion of manufactured homes by local governments is a major problem for the industry and consumers.  It artificially stunts industry growth, while it unfairly deprives Americans of access to the nation’s most affordable housing — effectively excluding lower and moderate-income citizens from entire communities.

While this phenomenon is dressed-up as “zoning” by those on the other side of the issue — in part because the federal government has historically been reluctant to interfere in local “zoning” matters — we need to be clear about what is actually going on, in the language we use to refer to it, and how we address it.

The reality — in many, if not most cases — is that “zoning” is simply a fig leaf for what amounts to discrimination; discrimination against our homes to be sure, but, more importantly, discrimination against the people who buy them, own them and live in them.

MMarkWeissJDMHARRCEOPresident-ManufacturedHousingAssociationRegulatoryReform

As MHARR has stressed before, there have never been more tools available to the industry and consumers to address this issue at — and beyond — HUD.  These include not only the enhanced preemption of the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000, but HUD’s new rules on affirmatively furthering fair housing and the recent Supreme Court decision allowing discrimination claims to be pursued based on evidence of “disparate impact.”  ##

(Editor’s note: This was the first for publication commentary sent in the wake of the Daily Business News report on a discriminatory zoning case, linked here. Two more Op-Eds on zoning are linked here and here.)

MMarkWeissCEO-MHARR-ManufacturedHousingAssociationforRegulatoryReform-posted-IndustryVoices-MHProNews

 

Mark Weiss
President & CEO
Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR)
1331 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W., Suite 512
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: 202/783-4087
Fax: 202/783-4075
Email: MHARRDG@AOL.COM