California MHP News

Tue, Jun 28, 2016 – Capital One announced it has provided Fannie Mae structured adjustable-rate (SARM) loans totaling $60.8 million to refinance four manufactured housing communities (MHCs) in California. Senior Vice President Chad Thomas Hagwood originated the transaction and Brandon Pate of Hagwood’s team managed the deal. Hagwood leads Capital One Multifamily Finance’s Southeast region out of the Birmingham, Alabama, office, and is one of the most experienced MHC originators in the industry.

The ten-year SARM loans have a three-year interest-only period followed by amortization on a 30-year schedule.

The borrower, the Kort & Scott Financial Group, has an 18-plus year relationship with Hagwood and has completed multiple transactions with Capital One. Based in Anaheim, CA, Kort & Scott specializes in buying and managing MHCs across the United States, acquiring over 9,500 mobile home spaces since 1989. The company is using the proceeds from this transaction to retire existing debt and maintain and upgrade the properties.

Tue, Jun 28, 2016 – Treat others the same way you want them to treat you.

The Legislature finds and declares that increasing numbers of Californians live in manufactured homes and mobilehomes and that most of those living in such manufactured homes and mobilehomes reside in mobilehome parks. Because of the high cost of moving manufactured homes and mobilehomes, most owners of manufactured homes and mobilehomes reside within mobilehome parks for substantial periods of time. Because of the relatively permanent nature of residence in such parks and the substantial investment which a manufactured home or mobilehome represents, residents of mobilehome parks are entitled to live in conditions which assure their health, safety, general welfare, and a decent living environment, and which protect the investment of their manufactured homes and mobilehomes.

Mon, Jun 27, 2016 – If you were served a three-day written notice along with a 60-day termination of tenancy, and you have not cured the default (paid your bill) within the 3-day period provided at the time the two (2) notices were served, SCM can consider your tenancy terminated after the first three-day written notice period has expired.

SCM have no legal obligation to accept your space rent during the remaining 57 days – there is no three-strikes rule. What does this mean? This means you may have only 57 days to move out. This means you may lose your mobile home.

Sun, Jun 26, 2016 – Is your mobile home park in a situation where the majority of the residents are living month to month and having a difficult time keeping up with rent increases? Do you feel as though you are one step away from homelessness each month when you receive your rent statement?

Have your pleas to City Council for a Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) fallen on deaf ears? Do you feel that you've exhausted all of your options and are now faced with an emergency situation?

You may want to consider a Mobile Home Park Rent Strike – it has been done before – successfully.

Thu, Jun 23, 2016 Updates – On Wednesday, June 22, 2016, Two Palms Real Estate LP changed its name on MH Village to Tri Palms Ventures Inc and added five (5) used mobile homes for sale bringing the total number to fifty-nine (59) used mobile homes posted for sale in two (2) weeks.

Fri, Jun 17, 2016 – On Monday, June 13, 2016, Wednesday, June 15, 2016 and Thursday, June 16, 2016, we received notification that Drita Bronkey from Two Palms Real Estate LP, a Kort & Scott Financial Group DBA selling mobile homes in its own mobile home parks, posted fifty-four (54) mobile homes for sale in eighteen (18) KSFG/SCM California mobile home parks on MH Village.

Wed, Jun 22, 2016 – DO NOT sign a Kort & Scott Financial Group (KSFG) dba Sierra Corporate Management (SCM) Forbearance Agreement until you have sought professional and/or legal advice. Signing an SCM Forbearance Agreement waives your homeowner’s rights and releases KSFG/SCM from any and all past, present, and/or future liabilities, claims, disputes, controversies, suits, actions, causes of action, loss, debt, damages or injuries (collectively referred to as “claims”), matured or contingent, liquidated or unliquidated, known and unknown, suspected or unsuspected, which TENANT may have against PARK.

Tue, Jun 21, 2016 – From the 2016 California Mobilehome Residency Law Frequently Asked Questions: Rents, Fees and Taxes, 6. Security Deposit

Resident Question: Can the park charge first and last months’ rent plus a 2-month security deposit?

MRL Answer: Normally, when a mobilehome owner is accepted for residency in a mobilehome park and signs a rental agreement, charging first month’s rent and a 2-month security deposit are permitted. (Civil Code §798.39) After one full year of satisfactory residency (meaning all rent and fees have been paid during that time), the resident is entitled to request a refund of the 2-month security deposit, or may request a refund at the time he or she vacates the park and sells the home. (Civil Code §798.39(b))
2016 California MRL FAQs

Submit your request for a security deposit refund in writing to Sierra Corporate Management today! The MRL specifically states that SCM must refund your deposit after one full year of satisfactory residency. Do not wait until you vacate the park and/or sell your mobile home.

Sat, Jun 18, 2016 – It’s common for park owners to use long-term leases to get around rent control, agreed Richard Walker, an attorney with the Public Law Center in Santa Ana. The firm offers free legal assistance to low-income people and nonprofits.

Gary Young, the park’s resident representative who with resident Jill Martinez first started hearing about a trend toward leases, believes the park’s practices unscrupulous. The park takes advantage of people that know nothing. There's no benefit for anybody to sign a lease.
Ventura County Star

Fri, Jun 10, 2016 Updates – The MHPHOA have developed a repository for litigation proceedings against Kort & Scott Financial Group (KSFG) DBAs and its mobile home park management company Sierra Corporate Management (SCM).

1. 2015-08-15 – Friendly Village Mobile Home Park
2. 2015-04-01 – Emerald Meadows Mobile Home Park
3. 2014-05-29 – Bayshore Villa Mobile Home Park
4. 2012-01-13 – Royal Western Mobile Home Park
5. 2009-08-26 – Hollydale Mobile Home Park
6. 2009-03-13 – Greenfield Mobile Home Estates
7. 2006-09-22 – Emerald Meadows Mobile Home Park
8. 2004-05-28 – Royal Western Mobile Home Park

Wed, Jun 8, 2016 Updates – Here are 746 names, a small percentage of "human lives", NOT chattel, that have been the victims of Kort & Scott Financial Group (KSFG) DBAs and Sierra Corporate Management (SCM) eviction proceedings in the California Civil Courts.

We've coined a new phrase for the process these individuals have endured for years, we call it being "Evictimized", and refer to the human lives as "Evictims", the victims of being victimized, and evicted from their mobile homes that many paid for in full – they rightfully owned their homes.

Wed, Jun 8, 2016 – Attention Mobile Home Owners and Residents: State Senator Connie M. Leyva, Chair of the Senate Committee on Manufactured Home Communities, in partnership with the City of Ontario, invites mobile home owners and renters to attend a community mobile home meeting. Free and open to the public.

• Date: Friday, June 17, 2016
• Time: 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM
• Location: De Anza Community Center
  1405 South Fern Avenue
  Ontario, California 91762

Source: GSMOL Events

Refreshed: Mon, Jun 6, 2016 – Published: Thu, Jan 28, 2016 – What you are seeing in the image below are thousands of documents titled "Investigative Report" which are from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) filed against Kort & Scott Financial Group DBAs. This information is available through a Public Information Request which we have filed for all of the KSFG parks that we are aware of in the State of California.

Complaint Types: Non Receipt of Title, Non Transfer of Title, Unlicensed Activity, Substandard Housing, Unlawful Use, Misrepresentation, Illegal Advertising, Breach of Contract, etc.

This is only a small portion of the requests and pertains mostly to one mobile home park, Royal Oak Manufactured Home Community in Davis, California which was sold by the KSFG DBA in 2015. It appears that KSFG were forced out of this park by the continual violations by the HCD, each one costing Kort & Scott Financial Group $2,000. In one set of these documents, Hart King, Attorneys at Law, acting on behalf of the KSFG DBA state this...

Dear OL Ombudsman Coordinator: We represent Davis Group, LP, the party subject to the above 11 citations. On April 22, 2015, we wrote to the Division of Codes and Standards Deputy Director requesting on behalf of our client, stating our objections to all of the Citations, and requesting an Informal Hearing. We have recently been advised that the Hearing Officer desires to hold 11 separate hearings as opposed to one single hearing even though the alleged violations are all similar. As a result, Davis Group LP has decided, for business and financial reasons only, that it is more sensible to pay the civil penalties. Among other reasons, the costs of preparing for and attending 11 separate hearings, which would include the hourly and travel expenses of counsel, expert witnesses and percipient witnesses, would far exceed the amount of the civil penalties, and it would take valuable personnel away from their jobs for an extended period of time.

We are therefore enclosing 11 checks from the Davis Group, LP, $2,000.00 each, covering each citation payable to the Department of Housing and Community Development, and requesting that the 11 Informal Hearings be taken off-calendar. Please confirm that this has been done at your earliest opportunity.

Please be advised that the payment of the civil penalties cannot and should not be considered an admission of any wrongdoing or liability on the part of the Davis Group for any of the violations appearing in the Citations or under any other law. The Davis Group is simply making the $22,000 in payments for business reasons, and continues to deny all liability under the Citations for, without limitation, the reasons stated in my April 22, 2015 letter to the Deputy Director.

We will have many questions for the HCD Division of Codes and Standards Deputy Director as we continue to "crunch the data" and provide summarized, filtered results for public consumption. Our first question for the Deputy Director of Codes and Standards would be:

Why haven't you taken this ‘Preponderance of the Evidence’ to the Office of the Attorney General for the State of California?