Mobile Home Laws (Orange, Cypress: sale, lease, credit rating) - Orange County - California (CA) - City-Data Forum

Mickeylayne · 11-22-2014, 12:53 PM

Hi there! My husband and I currently own, and are selling, a mobile home in a park in the city of Cypress, CA. (No Orange Co). We have lived in the home 17 year. When we moved into the home (1997), we signed a lease of 5 years. Of course, the lease has expired and we have never been asked to sign a new one, so we are on a month to month basis as far as the rent is concerned. When we talked to the manager of the park, he told us that according to the only lease they have with us, we are required to give them first rights of refusal when selling the home. Would anyone know if we are required to follow through with the lease's "right of first refusal" even though the lease is expired?
It says in the lease that if we refuse to follow through with this, the only penalty would be to pay the park $100. Can they force us to pay the $100, and can they legally come after us for anything else NOT mentioned in the lease if we do not comply? We are not worried so much about the $100. We are more worried about anything they can do above from what the lease says.

If no one can answer these questions, would someone kindly point us in the direction where we might get answers without paying legal fees?

nightlysparrow · 11-22-2014, 01:47 PM

You might want to try another section of this forum:

//www.city-data.com/forum/renting/

Electrician4you · 11-22-2014, 10:00 PM

Your lease has not expired. The term of a initial year length of time has expired but the term simply switched to a month to month. You are now under the same lease rules with a month to month term length. You and the park must still abide by the rules of that original lease since it's the only lease. So if it says they have first right of refusal in the lease then they have first tight if refusal. But refusal to what? Purchase or allow new tenant in? What is the first right of refusal pertain to?

Mickeylayne · 11-23-2014, 04:47 PM

Thanks so much for answering me! The right of first refusal, in this case, is the right to purchase the mobile home for the offer initially made. So, if a person offers us $34,000 for the home, we must take that offer to the management and they have the right to offer to buy the home for that amount or "refuse" it. If they don't want it, they don't respond within 2 days, and we can sell the house to the person who gave us the offer first. We have since discovered that, according to Golden State Mobile Home Owners League, if we are on a month to month land rental, we are not obligated to give the park first refusal. We also found out that, according to civil code section 798.15-798.22 "Management may not require a homeowner to sell his or her home to the park." So ultimately, even though we must offer the home to the park, we do not HAVE TO sell it to them.
The reason we do not want to sell to this park: The Corp. that owns this park has decided they can raise the land rent to hundreds more than any of the surrounding parks. Nearby parks charge roughly $1,000 monthly land rent. This park currently charges $1,575 and that figure will go up to $1,700 in January. We have tried to sell this house for what it would commonly go for in this city, around 44,900. We've gotten lots and lots of phone calls about the house, but as soon as they hear the rent, they almost hang up on me. We have even considered walking away from the house. Our credit rating right now is well over 800, and walking away from this house would reduce our rating to the mid 600s. So, to try everything we can to sell the house, we have reduced the house to only what we owe: $34,000. STILL...we have people rejecting it because of the rent.
We have had an offer from someone who can pay what we want in cash, and she wants to move the house out and put it on private land. However, we feel if we have to give the park right of first refusal, there's a chance they may want to buy it. We'd much rather go with the deal where the house is pulled. Yes. I admit. It's a spite thing. But this corporation has taken over other parks and raised the rent to the point where some senior homeowners with no options have been pushed to suicide. Yes, I admit, we are angry and it's a spite thing.
But now, if this civil code is fact, even though we have to offer them first rights of refusal, we don't have to sell to them. So sorry to be long winded. I want to thank you for answering me. Time is valuable, and I hope I haven't wasted too much of yours. If nothing else, this might give you an answer if someone else asks.....Blessings!

Electrician4you · 11-23-2014, 08:36 PM

If you are not legally bound to give a right of refusal and all it takes is selling it to a person who wants to buy and move it, why are you making it personal against the park? Just sell and move on. The rent raise/how they manage the park is their perogative. Enough people move they will have to drop the rates or risk losing all tenants. Unfortunately you are making this sale a very personal thing. If the park wants to buy it or the other buyer who wants it moved ultimately you sell get your money and keep your credit intact.
I would sell to whomever has the cash and move on with your life. You're stressing and making yourself miserable when you really don't need or have to.