Occasionally though, on the face of it, the idea is set out in such a way to the unsuspecting homeowner, as containing a degree off sympathy; a “way out” of a situation – but which is soon exposed as yet another ruse to deny the usually elderly victim of their legal rights. What follows is an actual example of where a well know operator went behind the back of the resident, writing directly to a local housing officer to “help” the homeowner move into local authority housing. In itself, that might have been acceptable…..

However, the full picture emerged that such “kindness” was triggered only because an application had just been received by the park owner to refurbish the park home, for which a Council – funded grat had been agreed to. It also meant that the park owner was deliberately preventing the homeowner from her legal obligation under the Mobile Homes Act, to maintain the home in accordance with her Written Statement (Agreement).

Undoubtedly, the park owners true objective was to drive the homeowner out of her home, offering her a pittance in return for removing the home and, before the plot got cold, put a brand new home in its place.

The letter, written by a senior member of the park operators staff, reads;

Dear Mr. (Housing manager of Local Authority)

Further to your letter of (date) as previously advised, we are unfortunately of the view that due to many years of lack of maintenance on this home, it is unsuitable for this type of refurbishment and ongoing occupation.

We would reiterate our view that thought should be given to rehousing Mrs. (homeowner) into more suitable accommodation by the local authority.

Yours sincerely.

It is particularly important ti note the two instances where the park operator’s representative expresses his ‘own view’, rather than to rely upon the knowledge of an independent surveyor, however difficult that ma be in practice to achieve, in such circumstances. Ultimately, of course, it is for a court to decide upon whether a home is detrimental to the park as a whole – which of course it wouldn’t be, when the forbidden improvements had taken place!

This example concludes with the news that the planned refurbishment did take place, after intervention by a solicitor, Sadly, the occupier has since died, and the home is up for sale. No prizes for guessing the difficulties ahead for the daughter trying to secure her legal right to sell and secure the true market value. Those sitting around that imaginary table have long since created a vast list of hurdles to cross. If horses cant always clear them, you know that elderly human beings are not a good bet either, within the risky gambling park home course.

Written and produced for PHRAA by Colin Packman President. June 2008.