Magistrate orders repairs or demolition within 30 days for unfit mobile home on Sherman Avenue

A Bay County special magistrate on the record found a mobile home at Lot 51, 2300 Sherman Avenue in Panama City to be an unfit and unsafe structure and ordered the respondent to obtain required permits within 30 days or obtain a demolition permit.

The magistrate said the respondent has 30 days to have a permit in hand and submitted the required documentation — either a demolition permit and removal of debris or a complete building permit application that includes the mobile home manufacturer’s specifications for that model, or engineered plans showing the deviations. The magistrate scheduled a compliance hearing for late April; the magistrate said the respondent must have a permit in hand within 30 days or face further action.

The magistrate’s order followed testimony and photographs from Bay County code enforcement staff showing extensive exterior and interior damage, missing or rotten studs, compromised insulation, water penetration and evidence of mold. Inspector Thorpe testified that some interior gypsum board could be pushed through and that structural framing was missing in sections around window openings. Catherine Ashman, Bay County code enforcement manager, introduced the case history, including a prior hearing on Feb. 12 and a second inspection on Feb. 14.

Respondent Daniel Marlow said he agreed with many of the inspector’s observations but described difficulty obtaining title information for the mobile home after purchasing it from the deceased prior park owner, Adrian Clark Fletcher Jr. Marlow said the process to correct the title and then apply for permits was underway and that a new park owner was assisting with getting a VIN and title paperwork.

The magistrate emphasized that superficial fixes such as re-siding would not cure structural defects. The magistrate described required submissions for repairs: manufacturer specifications or engineered plans; a detailed action plan and time frames; and that all permit inspections must be completed and permits finalized before repairs are considered complete. If a permit is issued but later allowed to expire, that would be treated as noncompliance.

The magistrate introduced the record evidence, including the earlier hearing order and photographs, and entered a finding of violation of Bay County Code chapter 17, section 2. The respondent was given 30 days to secure the required permit in hand; the magistrate said obtaining the permit gives “breathing room” but that the permit itself must be obtained within the timeframe. A compliance hearing was set for April (the magistrate referenced an April late-April date at 9:00 a.m.).

Marlow said contractors had given high dollar estimates to pull permits and that he could not afford some of the quoted fees; he said he was doing what he could to get title paperwork, the VIN and to transfer title so he could pull permits. The magistrate recorded that the prior owner, Adrian Clark Fletcher Jr., had died and that the lack of clear title complicated the timeline for permit issuance.

The magistrate summarized required next steps and told Marlow to stay in contact with code enforcement. The order requires: either demolition and debris removal under a demolition permit, or submission of a complete building permit application including manufacturer specifications or engineered plans; a structural report and a detailed action plan with timeframes; and completion of permit inspections and finalization of permits. The magistrate said if the respondent does not have a permit in hand in 30 days the case would be brought back for noncompliance.