Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Writ Of Possession Manufactured Homes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill letting manufactured homes remain on lot 30 days after writ of possession
Summary
A committee approved Senate Bill 644 to clarify how writs of possession are executed when a manufactured home is on the property, allowing the unit to remain in place for 30 days so owners can arrange removal.
A legislative committee voted to give Senate Bill 644 a favorable recommendation after hearing that current writ-of-possession procedures can impose severe and impractical costs when the property subject to removal is a manufactured home.
The bill, presented by JD Harper of the Harpreetown Manufactured Housing Association and introduced on behalf of Senator Matt McKee, would amend the writ-of-possession statute so that when a manufactured home is present the home may remain on the property for 30 days after execution of the writ. That period would allow owners time to arrange for removal rather than requiring immediate storage in a public warehouse.
JD Harper told the committee that the strict letter of the law “had to be followed, and the personal property had to be removed and stored in a public warehouse. It's hard to do that with a manufactured home.” He described practical obstacles: limited public warehouse space suitable for a home and the need to remove air conditioning, plumbing, skirting and anchoring, which can add thousands of dollars to the cost of moving a unit.
Senator Matt McKee, identified for the record as “Matt McKee, state senate district 6,” explained the measure was previously part of another bill and was stripped out and presented separately to address the narrow, practical problem for sheriffs and county attorneys executing writs.
The chair called for and received a motion for a “do pass” recommendation; the motion was seconded and the committee recorded the motion as carried.
If enacted, the bill would change post-judgment possession procedures only as to manufactured homes; the committee record does not show additional changes to storage or removal rules beyond the 30-day placement period. The committee did not hear opponents for or against the bill during the recorded testimony.
Committee members did not request further amendments on the floor; proponents said they were available to answer questions but none were raised formalizing changes on the record.
The committee’s recommendation moves the bill forward in the legislative process; subsequent floor action, enrollment, and any effective date were not specified in the committee record.
