5 ms·

John Oliver (love him or hate him does not matter!) did a video on this issue a while back: http://time.com/5565832/john-oliver-mobile-homes-last-week-tonight/

John Oliver (love him or hate him does not matter!) did a video on this issue a while back: http://time.com/5565832/john-oliver-mobile-homes-last-week-tonight/ http://time.com/5565832/john-oliver-mobile-homes-last-week-t... The TL;DR is owning a mobile home but leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. More detail: Large funds are buying up mobile home parks and increasing the monthly rent for the lot. Since a mobile home is not really mobile (watch the video) the person living there is trapped. The fund wins even if the resident leaves because they can take ownership of the home and lease it to someone else.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
>The TL;DR is owning a mobile home but leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. This gets a lot blurrier when you're talking about things that are closer to a travel trailer than a mobile home. Those can be packed up and moved in less than a day. You're basically renting a parking space with water/electrical/sewer hook ups at that point. If you need a wide load permit to move it you should definitely own the land.
- mercwear 7y ago
  I agree - and you normally lease land for a travel trailer in short spurts (for instance, the winter) and move on.
- fjsolwmv 7y ago
  Look around you. A mobile home is generally the most cumbersome and expensive-to-move (and store somewhere!) yet valuable thing you can own. Your car is big but moves under its own power. If a landlord evicts you, any sane law would require them to disburse any value from possessions you leave onsite, minus reasonable disposal or administration costs.
- thorwasdfasdf 7y ago
  But, what if there's no where to move to? We live in a time and age when voters and the govt that represent them are ever more stingy with land usage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we end up with no-where to put the mobile home due to zoning and regulation. In that case, the existing mobile home park owners will be able to raise rents to whatever they want: this is the biggest danger. To Fight it, we must make more land available and remove all zoning. Look cities without zoning like Houstan (places people can actually afford to live), they end up far more prosperous, and far fewer of their citizens ever have a need to move into mobile homes.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    Mobile homes are rolling trash we don't need more places to put them we need to educate people so they wont throw their money away.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      Mobile homes are the cheapest way to live long term if you treat them right: buy one to live in for 20/30 years and scrap it, buying a new one. Your long term costs will be less than rent of a small apartment in most cases. They are not an investment in any way. A house is somewhat an investment in that you can sell it in 30 years and get a lot of money back which won't apply to rent (note that I didn't call a house a good investment: it might be but it might not depending on many factors)
  - vlan0 7y ago
    >But, what if there's no where to move to? We live in a time and age when voters and the govt that represent them are ever more stingy with land usage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we end up with no-where to put the mobile home due to zoning and regulation. In that case, the existing mobile home park owners will be able to raise rents to whatever they want: this is the biggest danger. This has been happening in the industry for at least a couple of decades. Zoning laws are increasingly restrictive and force folks to rely on mobile home parks. Source: My family has been in the mobile/modular home business since the 60's.
fjsolwmv 7y ago
There are a million ways poor people suffer for being poor. In my opinion cataloging all million is less useful than working to acquire and protect wealth, by fighting against (and seizing the resources of) the powerful forces that array against them. Onesie twosie banning specific exploitations is not scaleable, and the powerful forces will quickly move in to find other ways to pick pockets to the bone.
- purplezooey 7y ago
  The problem with this argument is that there's a big difference in the starting line in the race.
- DesiLurker 7y ago
  So basically 'you dont have to outrun the bear, just the slowest camper'.. right?
- MoveMyMobile 7y ago
  There are free market solutions to the problem with mobile home parks. Even from an economic standpoint there is a huge inefficiency in the industry to the benefit of the landlords.
fpgaminer 7y ago
> leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. Funnily enough, there's a city nearby that's quite expensive to live in (even for California), because it's beach-side. And of course in every expensive city there's an even more expensive neighborhood. Except, for some bizarre reason, this wealthy neighborhood has a similar arrangement where the residents own their homes, but rent the land. Except all the homes are your typical McMansions and permanent; they aren't mobile homes. I was a bit baffled by the whole thing. It's like an HOA but worse. Perhaps those living there believe that because they are wealthy they aren't worried about any of the consequences normally associated with the mobile-home trap.
- yardie 7y ago
  That's probably BLM, state gov, or native American land. It's not as bad as it seems because the leases are typically 99 years. Countries such as a Thailand will have 99 year leases. A few will have 200 and 300 year leases. Lots of homeowners in the UK don't own the land their house is on.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

>The TL;DR is owning a mobile home but leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. This gets a lot blurrier when you're talking about things that are closer to a travel trailer than a mobile home. Those can be packed up and moved in less than a day. You're basically renting a parking space with water/electrical/sewer hook ups at that point. If you need a wide load permit to move it you should definitely own the land.

mercwear 7y ago
I agree - and you normally lease land for a travel trailer in short spurts (for instance, the winter) and move on.
fjsolwmv 7y ago
Look around you. A mobile home is generally the most cumbersome and expensive-to-move (and store somewhere!) yet valuable thing you can own. Your car is big but moves under its own power. If a landlord evicts you, any sane law would require them to disburse any value from possessions you leave onsite, minus reasonable disposal or administration costs.
thorwasdfasdf 7y ago
But, what if there's no where to move to? We live in a time and age when voters and the govt that represent them are ever more stingy with land usage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we end up with no-where to put the mobile home due to zoning and regulation. In that case, the existing mobile home park owners will be able to raise rents to whatever they want: this is the biggest danger. To Fight it, we must make more land available and remove all zoning. Look cities without zoning like Houstan (places people can actually afford to live), they end up far more prosperous, and far fewer of their citizens ever have a need to move into mobile homes.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  Mobile homes are rolling trash we don't need more places to put them we need to educate people so they wont throw their money away.
  - bluGill 7y ago
    Mobile homes are the cheapest way to live long term if you treat them right: buy one to live in for 20/30 years and scrap it, buying a new one. Your long term costs will be less than rent of a small apartment in most cases. They are not an investment in any way. A house is somewhat an investment in that you can sell it in 30 years and get a lot of money back which won't apply to rent (note that I didn't call a house a good investment: it might be but it might not depending on many factors)
- vlan0 7y ago
  >But, what if there's no where to move to? We live in a time and age when voters and the govt that represent them are ever more stingy with land usage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we end up with no-where to put the mobile home due to zoning and regulation. In that case, the existing mobile home park owners will be able to raise rents to whatever they want: this is the biggest danger. This has been happening in the industry for at least a couple of decades. Zoning laws are increasingly restrictive and force folks to rely on mobile home parks. Source: My family has been in the mobile/modular home business since the 60's.

fjsolwmv 7y ago

There are a million ways poor people suffer for being poor. In my opinion cataloging all million is less useful than working to acquire and protect wealth, by fighting against (and seizing the resources of) the powerful forces that array against them. Onesie twosie banning specific exploitations is not scaleable, and the powerful forces will quickly move in to find other ways to pick pockets to the bone.

purplezooey 7y ago
The problem with this argument is that there's a big difference in the starting line in the race.
DesiLurker 7y ago
So basically 'you dont have to outrun the bear, just the slowest camper'.. right?
MoveMyMobile 7y ago
There are free market solutions to the problem with mobile home parks. Even from an economic standpoint there is a huge inefficiency in the industry to the benefit of the landlords.

fpgaminer 7y ago

> leasing the land (lot) underneath it is a very bad idea and will most likely harm you financially. Funnily enough, there's a city nearby that's quite expensive to live in (even for California), because it's beach-side. And of course in every expensive city there's an even more expensive neighborhood. Except, for some bizarre reason, this wealthy neighborhood has a similar arrangement where the residents own their homes, but rent the land. Except all the homes are your typical McMansions and permanent; they aren't mobile homes. I was a bit baffled by the whole thing. It's like an HOA but worse. Perhaps those living there believe that because they are wealthy they aren't worried about any of the consequences normally associated with the mobile-home trap.

yardie 7y ago
That's probably BLM, state gov, or native American land. It's not as bad as it seems because the leases are typically 99 years. Countries such as a Thailand will have 99 year leases. A few will have 200 and 300 year leases. Lots of homeowners in the UK don't own the land their house is on.