something to think about

[Dave Walter]

And how is this going to be enforced? I can just picture "the man" knocking on your camper door and saying, "according to our records, you have stayed in your trailer for 29 consecutive nights. One more night and you will be legally defined as a full timer, and we will have to take you in. I would advise that you spend the next couple of nights in a motel."

You may all have to escape to Canada where it is legal to stay in your rv as long as you want, providing that you can manage the cold in the winter.

[Marky]

Truck drivers keep a log. It might be done like that. It could be by using the info on the number of nights you stayed at a state or federal park. We might even be forced to get a permit every time we travel. For a small fee of course.
The part that really concerns me is the requirement to adhere to building codes. I don't know if the Escape would meet these codes. We might not be able to import an Escape if this bill is passed. The first statement defines this. It would be like trying to import a foreign car.

"This rulemaking proposes to incorporate ANSI A119.5-15 and NFPA 1192-15 consensus standards for Recreational Vehicles by reference. The ANSI A119.5-15 standard covers fire and life safety criteria and plumbing for PMRVs considered necessary to provide a reasonable level of protection from loss of life from fire and explosion. The NFPA 1192-15 standard provides the minimum construction standards considered necessary to protect against loss of life from fire and explosion for non-Park Model Recreational Vehicles.

[D&R_SC]

"something to think about"

I really prefer post titles that give some clue as to what the post is about.

David

[rbryan4]

Originally Posted by Marky

I just realized your my neighbor! I'm just south of you!

Wow, Laredo eh?

Too hot for me, and I like heat.

[StarvingHyena]

I'm one who is glad to be informed of issues like this that could effect us all. Usually, unenforceable regulations like this one is pretty easy to squash .... in its early stages. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.


There are many similar issues that I find concerning ... like continued funding for our Park systems (at all levels of government) and wild spaces..... funding to keep our road infrastructure intact .... particularly less traveled back roads and others. As budgets drop, it may well require our voices to keep poorly thought out regulations like this one out of the law books. I could easily see a regulation such as this being a way to extract more fees from RV owners .... why else make an attempt at a such a regulation.


I hope discussions like this thread isn't seen as about politics but rather as a "heads up". Please continue.


Tom

[C&G in FL]

Originally Posted by ice-breaker

And how is this going to be enforced? I can just picture "the man" knocking on your camper door and saying, "according to our records, you have stayed in your trailer for 29 consecutive nights. One more night and you will be legally defined as a full timer, and we will have to take you in. I would advise that you spend the next couple of nights in a motel."

You may all have to escape to Canada where it is legal to stay in your rv as long as you want, providing that you can manage the cold in the winter.

Naw. Just bring a small tent with you. Pitch it every so often. When Big Brother comes knocking, just tell him you are not full timing in the RV because some of the time you use the tent!

And the move to Canada probably wouldn't work. Whatever stupid bureaucrats in the US do, there will be stupid bureaucrats in Canada who will think it is a good idea and will jump on the band wagon. Of course, certain priviledged groups in both countries will be exempted.

[cpaharley2008]

Originally Posted by D&R_MA

"something to think about"

I really prefer post titles that give some clue as to what the post is about.

David

If you knew the ending you would not read the book.....

[Patandlinda]

Originally Posted by StarvingHyena

I'm one who is glad to be informed of issues like this that could effect us all. Usually, unenforceable regulations like this one is pretty easy to squash .... in its early stages. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.


There are many similar issues that I find concerning ... like continued funding for our Park systems (at all levels of government) and wild spaces..... funding to keep our road infrastructure intact .... particularly less traveled back roads and others. As budgets drop, it may well require our voices to keep poorly thought out regulations like this one out of the law books. I could easily see a regulation such as this being a way to extract more fees from RV owners .... why else make an attempt at a such a regulation.


I hope discussions like this thread isn't seen as about politics but rather as a "heads up". Please continue.


Tom

Pat

[thoer]

Originally Posted by D&R_MA

"something to think about"

I really prefer post titles that give some clue as to what the post is about.

David

ETI is a Canadian company. many (most?) of the people using this Forum are Canadians. This thread is about US politics. Yes it can be argued that it is about a proposed US regulation that might impact upon US RV users, but that fact is being used as an excuse to post ones own political viewpoints here.

To me, this thread, out of common courtesy, should at least be named to reflect that it is about US politics, so that our Canadian friends can more easily ignore it. They, like many of us Americans, can get our fill of politics easily elsewhere. I personally think that this thread already contains posts that are violating Forum rules. At the very least it should be more accurately named.

Let's not be like noisy US neighbors in a nice quiet Canadian campground.

[cpaharley2008]

I beg to differ with you Eric, I'm not running for any office nor am I tying to collect votes, that is the definition of politics. I am merely disseminating information, you can do what you want with it, but please do not label it.

[Jim Bennett]

Originally Posted by D&R_MA

"something to think about"

I really prefer post titles that give some clue as to what the post is about.

David

I'm in complete agreement with you and Eric. The thread title is very important and should not be just an open ended statement, but instead give an idea of the subject of the thread. At FGRV we often change the title to better reflect the subject of the thread. Makes searching way easier too.

[MyronL]

I thought it pretty obvious Luther of Lutherville is a the-sky-is-falling blowhard.

[Klem]

Originally Posted by MyronL

I thought it pretty obvious Luther of Lutherville is a the-sky-is-falling blowhard.

Actually not. He has a way of communicating based on how he thinks ... Just like you have.

For all of us that have RV of any kind should do a little research and see that it applies to 'us'.

I will post some examples from my trailer later but for now this is the issue. I called the DOT and HUD to discuss this.

RV's have never had a 'housing code' because they were considered temporary, used a few weeks a year, and were considered a fancy tent. There are DOT regulations regarding the highway safety aspects of the outside.

The RV manufacturers have fought to keep even simple plumbing and electrical codes from applying to their products. They must comply with DOT and anything else is voluntary.

RV are no longer fancy tents ... And manufacturers cut every possible corner to cut costs and remain competitive. People are looking for affordable housing and an RV can meet the need.

So don't shoot the messengers, instead do some independent research and discuss the real issues and how they apply to me and you .. RV owners.

Search thetinylife.com to get you started. Notice some have wheels ... Why?

[rbryan4]

Post of the day Klem. It's not really political. It's a proposed reg that could potentially affect any full timer in the US. What's a more appropriate forum than an RV forum to discuss the ramifications of that?

[Klem]

From thetinyhouse ..

Next powerful tool to have in the tool box is know the laws, codes and speak the language. I can’t stress this enough, it take a lot of time and it is a frustrating process, but being legal savvy is very helpful. For example, if you state your primary dwelling is, in fact, the normal sized house you park your Tiny House behind, this means that you do not live in the Tiny House and it is simply a trailer. By knowing the system we can exploit it’s weaknesses in a legal manner, much as a shady lawyer would do to get his client off on a technicality. Basically you want to legally show you live somewhere else, that no one lives in the trailered Tiny House, and that it is a trailer that is compliance with zoning.

[rbryan4]

Good advice but I don't really agree with them on this part:

Originally Posted by Klem

From thetinyhouse ..

Basically you want to legally show you live somewhere else, that no one lives in the trailered Tiny House, and that it is a trailer that is compliance with zoning.

That sounds like an attempt to skirt the law, rather than complying with it and working for sensible laws and regs that benefit everyone. If you live in it, you live in it. It shouldn't be illegal to do so. If it is, they should focus their efforts on changing that.

[Klem]

Usually this is a tax assessor or they just send a letter, but you can usually settle their fears when they see that it is on wheels and you can say that you are storing it here for a week, month, etc. in accordance with zoning laws; at that point pull out a copy of the code and they will generally leave you alone. Again, knowing the legal speak can get you out of this.

[gbaglo]

Perhaps we should get worked up about those tags on cushions and pillows that say Do Not Remove ( prior to sale ).

[cpaharley2008]

Originally Posted by Jim Bennett

I'm in complete agreement with you and Eric. The thread title is very important and should not be just an open ended statement, but instead give an idea of the subject of the thread. At FGRV we often change the title to better reflect the subject of the thread. Makes searching way easier too.

My thread, my title, your thread, your title, very simple.

[Jim Bennett]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

My thread, my title, your thread, your title, very simple.

My post, my opinion, very simple.

I am simply wanting to help people.