I am also concerned about what appears to be abuse by some site owners of their role in approving the purchaser when a resident wishes to sell his park home in the open market. It seems clear that a small minority of site owners will routinely block sales for their own financial gain. I intend to consult on measures which would aim to eliminate this unacceptable practice and extend the role of the Residential Property Tribunal in the approval process.

I intend to carry out a public consultation on these proposals in the spring.

PHRAA’s Response…….. Paragraph 1 of the above….

The first question the Government needs to answer is…. Where are these specialist officers who will be adjudicating on these park home disputes to receive the training obviously necessary to operate this “dedicated, low cost specialist (housing) tribunal which can deal with cases quickly and without the parties needing to be legally represented”.? We would suggest that the only professional bodies who would claim to posses the necessary experience to carry out such training would be the two national park/mobile, holiday home trade organisations the British Holiday & Home Parks Association (BH&HPA) and National Park Homes Council (NPHC) (NCC) no doubt ably assisted by the likes of their expert specialist legal teams such as Tozers and Turbervilles. If this is the case then what guarantee has the innocent and vulnerable park home residents that he/she will receive a fair and unbiased hearing.? As all too many unfortunate park homeowners already know, even finding a high street Solicitor who has even a scant knowledge of the Mobile Homes Act 1983/2006., is almost impossible. Can the Government guarantee that the operators of this new system prove to be any more knowledgeable.????

We suspect that in practice the likely scenario at many of these hearings could be as follows….. Frightened little old lady, gentleman or couple with a genuine dispute against their park owner, bravely trying to plead their case, being faced with a determined park owner represented by his specialist legal team. Only the most determined and brave resident/s would be able to present their own case in a confident manner whilst feeling intimidated by the overwhelming opposition. Is this really a fair hearing situation? Again the phrase “living in cloud cuckoo land” springs readily to mind???? (Also see the excellent article by Graham Watts entitled PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ON PARK HOMES 16^th December 2010, published elsewhere on this website)

We note that this legislation is being taken through Parliament by means of a Statutory Instrument. Unfortunately in this case this means that it is pushed through almost without any debate in Parliament as were the 2006 amendments to the Implied terms of the 1983 Mobile Homes Act, and as many of us park home owners know all too well it is us that are suffering the consequences of that travesty. The park owners, especially the unscrupulous variety are laughing, at our expense, all the way to the bank.

We note with a feeling of despair that within this very brief statement, which quite frankly, pays only passing lip service to the very real problems suffered by many park home owners nationwide, that Mr. Shapps states that he intends to yet again CONSULT on no less than a further five measures which he claims will improve the park home industry for park homeowners. The first of these he claims “could improve and modernise the licensing regime that applies to caravan and park home sites”…..Perhaps a good place for him to start would be to observe one fundamental and crucial fact before proceeding? This being that, in legal terms, there are no such things as PARK HOME SITES. The legal definition of a Park/ Mobile Home, whatever its size, as set out in the governments own legislation, is classified as a caravan, (see elsewhere on this website) and in order to comply with this outdated and in 2011 ridiculous Government legislation, must remain capable of being moved from place to place at all times. Hence caravans, park/ mobile homes, residential and holiday are licensed under the terms of the Caravans Control of Development Act 1960. , as CARAVAN SITES. Perhaps it should be the duty of his colleagues and advisors within his Department to advise the Minister that Residential Park / Mobile Homes although they, by law (MHAct) , have to be the occupiers only or main residence and their homes nevertheless are not property in law as are bricks and mortar residences, but a CHATTEL. In the same sentence the Minister then goes on to state that this would “….enable local authorities to more effectively monitor and enforce licenses….” This should surely mean enforcement of the legal Conditions issued by the local authority as part of the Licence and which the site owner is supposed to abide by. Why does the Minister claim he needs to consult on this issue as Local Authorities already posses the necessary powers of enforcement. Unfortunately for the helpless residents who suffer from the site owners failure to comply with these conditions, which are basic legal requirements, they mostly come up against a brick wall when trying to get their particular local authority licensing officers to even take their complaints seriously, let alone use their existing powers of enforcement.

The Minister then continues with his second stated intention to consult as follows…. “ I intend to consult on giving local authorities powers to charge site owners for their licensing functions and services….” What a brilliant idea. If this scheme is adopted park owners will be handed, on a gold plate, a fool proof method of adding yet another heavy burden on residents in the form of astronomical pitch fee increases or charges. One thing is certain it wont be the site owner paying this proposed charge, it will be the helpless resident as usual who picks up the bill. It must be sign of the times if the best solution the Minster and his advisors can come up with to resolve this problem is to add on a charge. The sentence then concludes “……- instead of these being funded by the tax payer or not provided at all to a satisfactory standard because authorities do not have the resources to do so.” considering the fact that , compared to the occupiers of bricks and Mortar, park homeowners, considering that they live in a wooden box on wheels, which as required by law has to be capable of being moved from place to place at all times, pay a very disproportionate amount in Council Tax each year for which they receive virtually nothing in the way of services or help from the authorities in return, we would have thought we were at least entitled to expect some consideration. But from this it would seem that we are not. It is no wonder that long suffering park homeowners regard themselves as SECOND CLASS CITIZENS. Further more in to days financial climate what hope have us park homeowners got of obtaining a fair deal from authorities when the Minister claims that local authorities have not got the resources to supply help to elderly and vulnerable park homeowners.

Minister states “ I am also concerned about what appears to be abuse by some site owners of their role in approving the purchaser when a resident wishes to sell his home on the open market”. “…..APPEARS TO BE ADUSE……” Does this Government never listen? This matter is so serious and the consequences devastating for the thousands of helpless homeowners affected, can hardly be played down by calling it “ABUSE” . IT AMOUNTS TO DOWNRIGHT FRAUD and to make matters even worse this widespread despicable practice ‘ROBS‘, and I make no apologies whatsoever for using this term, ‘Robs’ Steals and Blatantly Defrauds with currently total impunity, helpless, vulnerable, totally defenceless (when up against a ruthless park owner) elderly park homeowners, many will be widows living alone, the very aged and infirm, forced to move to more suitable accommodation due to onset of ill health. Unlike Robin Hood, these rogue owners ROB THE POOR TO SWELL THE ALLREADY OVERFLOWING POCKETS OF THE RICH SITE OWNERS encouraged by the total lack of will to take action, successive Governments including the present one. Every day yet another park home owner is being illegally robbed of his/hers life savings, possibly amounting to tens of thousands of pounds. Add these incidences together over a year and it could well total a million pounds plus in trhe value of assets stripped directly from the poorest to satisfy the richest. Who says “CRIME DOES NOT PAY”. Successive Government Ministers who have the power to halt this disgraceful exploitation of the elderly, should be ashamed of themselves and PHRAA hopes that the same thing never happens to them or any of their loved ones in their old age.

The Minister then goes on to trot out the usual park home industry, BH&HPA NPHC and certain national park home residents association representatives, generated propaganda that it is only “….a small MINORITY of site owners who will routinely block sales for their own financial gain.” It is obvious to PHRAA that in spite of being constantly told otherwise the Minister prefers to ignore the pleas for help from distressed homeowners, preferring instead to bend over backwards to favour the aspirations of the park owners. It should also be remembered that the BH&HPA boasts that it has the funds, amongst other things, to constantly lobby MP’s and the Government to combat any changes in legislation which would be a threat to the industry. (PARK OWNERS) (See BEHIND THE SCENES new article by Colin Packman elsewhere on this website) ******** Readers will remember that earlier in his statement he stated “ ….and therefore better protect the many thousands of older households who live in this sector“. Could this actually be an admission from the Minister despite continual denials ,that there are indeed many thousands who really do need protection. Whether or not this is the case it certainly makes a mockery of the “MINORITY” claims

The Minister then concludes this statement by claiming that he intends to “….consult on measures which would aim to eliminate this unacceptable practice…….” What again. How many more times does he need to consult? Perhaps he thinks that if he keeps on promising to consult, the ever growing numbers of park homeowners being ripped off in this manner will have died off or got fed up and gone away, saving him the bother? I am sure that many disillusioned and disgusted homeowners will still be smarting from the results of an earlier consultation exercise a couple of years ago carried on by the previous administration concerning reviewing the unpopular 10% payment mandatory upon the homeowner on the sale price of their home. (If they could sell it that is) The clear result of this exercise was an overwhelming majority in favour of reducing this payment. But unfortunately for homeowners, the then Government Minister decided in favour of retaining the status quo, thereby totally disregarding the majority view in favour of the site owners. With results like that which blatantly favour the industry, how can we park homeowners trust Governments consultation process.?

One crucial question regarding these proposed consultations is …. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO ALL THE VALUABLE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THE RESULTS GATHERED IN THE NUMEROUS PREVIOUS CONSULTATION EXERCISES CONDUCTED BY GOVERNMENT OVER THE YEARS. WE can only assume that as all this information is required all over again, that all previous material has been dispatched to the Department of Communities SHREDDER????? What other answer can there be????? We would respectfully point out to the Minister that many folk have spent many hours of unpaid work supplying the Government with the relevant information, many at the risk of terrifying reprisals from ruthless rogue owners desperate to suppress the truth concerning their dubious activities against their captive residents.

PHRAA would also question why the Minister feels it necessary to consult on this matter when, as PHRAA has repeatedly pointed out, (see elsewhere on this website) the solution is simple and , we would claim, glaringly obvious. The mechanism for implementation already exists within the Implied Terms of the Mobile Homes Act 1983/2006. The Act clearly states that the occupier (homeowner) has the legal right to sell their home and assign their agreement (contract) to the buyer. All that is needed, and it is not ‘rocket science’, is to make that right “ABSOLUTE” thus deleting the site owners right to interfere or have any say in who is entitled to buy the home. Obviously such a change will bring howls of protest from certain park owners deprived of their right to block sales, claiming that if this solution were to be adopted they would not be able to prevent unsavoury or unsuitable residents coming on to their parks. But in the unlikely event of this situation arising, (most elderly an retired folk who are the most likely buyers are not tearaways or yobs) the site owner has ample redress to deal with any incomers unacceptable behaviour under other Implied and or Express Terms of the Agreement (contract). Which is more that can be said for homeowners who have no such redress when the site owner sells or rents out homes to unsuitable and disruptive occupiers. As some of us will know already to our cost this practice by site owners is very often used to “persuade” vulnerable residents to leave the park to enable the siting and sale of brand new homes at an average profit for the park owner of approximately £100,000 each.

Finally the Minister is claiming that he intends to “…..extend the role of the Residential Property Tribunal in the approval process.” As rogue park owners are proven to routinely ignore COURT ORDERS, does the Minister really believe that they will take any notice of a tribunal service decision especially as it, by the Governments own admission, is not BACKED UP BY ANY ENFORCEMENT POWERS WHATSOEVER, and will necessitate further action through a court of law for failure to comply. This will be at the aggrieved residents own expense.

The Minister concludes this statement by stating that he intends to carry out a public consultation on these proposals in the spring. What again? PHRAA has been actively involved with the Government pressing for the need for the reform of park home law since 2002. Indeed our President Colin Packman for over 40 years. There has also been the launch of the “JUSTICE FOR PARK HOMEOWNERS CAMPAIGN” as a result of which a Petition calling for the government to strengthen the law to allow homeowners to sell their homes on the open market, containing over 10,000 signatures, backed up by a demonstration attended by over a hundred park homeowners, at the Houses of Parliament.

Even after all that effort and hard work by the organisers and the sacrifice of those who attended, the Minister is still not listening. Instead he announces yet another round of time wasting consultations. No doubt the results of these will suffer the same fate as it appears the results of previous consultations have done. Being fed into the overworked Departments Shredder. I just hope and pray that all the hard work that has been put into this campaign by all those concerned is listened to by government and does not share the same fate as the Nationwide Petition calling for changes in the law to afford greater and enforceable protection for all park home residents, organised by PHRAA a couple of years ago, (see elsewhere on this website) (which, we noted at the time, did not enjoy the support of the other National Park Home Residents Associations). Although it was only open for signatures for the very limited period of 3 months, nevertheless it attracted over 1,300 signatures. This we felt was a terrific result considering it also had a very limited distribution. I am sure you will understand our dismay and disbelief when I tell you that in order to ensure that it would be delivered to the relevant Government department, I personally presented this Petition, complete with all the signatures to Lord Graham of Edmonton (Secretary of the All party Working Group) at the beginning of one of the meetings of this group, of which PHRAA is a member, held at Westminster. Although I have no doubt that Lord Graham honoured his assurance to me that he would pass this on to Government, we are absolutely disgusted to tell you that to this day PHRAA has not even had the courtesy of an acknowledgement from anyone within that government department or any conformation that they had even received it. I am sure that it is a safe bet to say that any material submitted by the park owners, BH&HPA and NPHC ,side would not share the same fate? No doubt as we have never heard anything of this since we have to assume that it too was used as fuel for the departments shedder?????

We have lost count over the years of the number of so called consultations carried out by government Departments, successive Ministers, Secretaries of State and civil servants. All that has been achieved is a package of amendments while purporting to offer greater protection for homeowners has only succeeded in further strengthening the law especially when manipulated in the rogue site owners favour, by the industries very “clever” specialist Legal teams headed by a very skilful and eminent park home law specialist Barrister, who commands astronomical appearance fees as many elderly and devastated park home residents unfortunate enough to be on the losing end of, what appeared to them having followed the Mobile Homes Act to the letter, a seeming cast iron case will surely testify, having been now made liable for many tens of thousands of pounds in extortionate costs. What price justice Mr Shapps???

PHRAA would respectfully suggest to the Minister that he has all the evidence already in his possession needed to take the appropriate immediate action to clean up this corrupt industry. Please do not fob us off any longer under the guise of issuing yet more consultation papers. This is just playing for time and is allowing even more park homeowners to be ripped off by rogue owners who are buying up parks at an ever increasing rate, then proceeding to clear off existing residents by any ruthless method available. We have already had widely reported cases of park homeowners being burnt out of their homes, by a rogue owner so sure, because of the lack of law, he would get away with it, he did not even bother to cover his tracks. We already have the case of many Doctors Surgeries throughout the nation full of park home residents suffering from stress related illnesses due to the ruthless antics of rogue site owners. No doubt many premature deaths could, if truth were known, be directly attributed to rogue owners. Are you going to wait until someone is murdered before you take action???? If, or rather when, this happens perhaps it would be grounds for yet another consultation paper.

Finally. Whilst at a meeting of the All Party Working Group at Westminster last year attended by staff from the Department of Communities, I had cause to question Mr. Robert Scheoch, the Departments representative as to why they seemed reluctant or unwilling to take action against rogue site owners, both of the residential park homes sector and the holiday caravans sector. The answer I received in a very aggressive manner was that I should remember that this was a 6 Billion Pound Industry. Yes, this may be the case, but Mr. Scheoch and the Government would do well to remember that it is only a 6 billion pound industry while it has customers. If the Government fails to take the necessary measures to rid this industry of the rogues in both sectors, It may not remain so for ever.

Please Minister, you have amassed all the evidence you need from the last 10 years of so called consultations to take action. To put it crudely, pull your finger out and get on with it Instead of pandering to the Industries demands, consider the plight of their exploited victims, who cannot fight back and bring in real and most importantly, ENFORCEABLE legislation ASAP. Park Home owners have suffered long enough. I repeat you have the evidence, why wont you listen to the residents point of view for a change?

Compiled for the PHRAA website by Ron Joyce. General Secretary. April 2011.