A New Way to Deal with Dilapidated Mobile Homes

The Municipal Law and Finance Group recently advised a client regarding the use of a relatively new statute – 30-A M.R.S. § 3106 – which provides municipalities with authority to take possession and dispose of mobile homes that have been abandoned. While the statute uses the term “abandoned,” it seems to also include mobile homes that are in a substantial state of disrepair. Code Enforcement Officers should consult municipal counsel before using the statute for a mobile home that is still inhabited. 

Section 3106 provides that the municipal officers may take corrective action after determining at a hearing that a mobile home has been abandoned. Notice of the hearing must be published or delivered at least seven days prior. 

The standards for making this determination are listed in 14 M.R.S. § 6326 and allow for a determination of abandonment if doors and windows have been boarded up, broken, or left unlocked; trash and debris has accumulated on the mortgaged premises; the premises constitute a threat to public health or safety; or the premises are unfit for occupancy. Only one of these must be proven true in order for the municipal officers to make a lawful finding of abandonment. 

After making such a determination at the hearing, the municipal officers must order that the conditions be addressed. Contents for the order are outlined in the statute. The order must give the property owner 60 days to correct the situation. If that deadline passes without action, the municipal officers are authorized to take possession of the mobile home and dispose of, it as well as any personal property located inside. Costs of doing so, including legal and administrative costs, may be assessed to the owner as a special tax if they remain unpaid after 30 days. 

Experienced CEOs will notice many parallels between this procedure and the more commonly used “dangerous building” statute (17 M.R.S. § 2851). Both allow for the process to be conducted either by the municipal officers or in court, and both allow for costs to be assessed as a personal tax. However, because Section 3106 sets a lower trigger for action, provides clear authority to dispose of personal property, and is more directly addressed to mobile homes, we recommend its use when dealing with dilapidated mobile homes.

Habitability of Rental Property – What Can/Should a Municipality Do?

Municipal officials are often asked to intervene when landlords fail to keep up rental properties to the satisfaction of their tenants. But when can—and should—municipalities get involved in these often thorny situations? Generally speaking, towns should make it their practice to simply advise upset tenants that they should consult with legal counsel or a legal services agency to try to resolve the issues. However, when there are significant health and safety issues at hand, such as malfunctioning sewer or septic systems, water shortages, or highly dangerous maintenance issues involved, municipalities do have some authority to intervene. 

Under 14 M.R.S. § 6026-A, a municipality may intervene to provide maintenance, repairs, or utilities if a landlord has failed to meet its obligation to provide them, causing an immediate threat to the habitability of the leased premises. To do so, the municipality must first make an effort to contact the landlord in person, by phone, or by certified mail to inform the landlord of the problem and of the municipality’s intent to intervene. If the landlord cannot be contacted or does not respond by the deadline set by the municipality, the municipality may provide the services and place a lien on the property for the cost of the services and any related administrative costs (this would include legal fees). Note that the lien is neither top-priority nor self-foreclosing, unlike other municipal liens. (See the statute for further details.) Towns with a large number of rental properties may want to consider appropriating money to a designated account to fund these situations.

In certain situations, municipalities may also have recourse through their own property maintenance ordinances, as well as the dangerous building law (17 M.R.S. § 2851), and/or the local health officer statutes (22 M.R.S. §§ 454-A; 1561). The dangerous building law is generally used when a building or rental unit is in such a state of disrepair that it is clearly unsafe for habitation. The laws enforced by the local health officer are more appropriate when dealing with accumulation of trash, mold, or other “sources of filth.” 

When dealing with rental property, municipal officials may enter and inspect leased premises on invitation by the tenant. Any notices should be sent to the property owner and (if any) maintenance company, and copied to the tenants. As long as the municipality makes a good effort to follow the procedures under the applicable statute, there should be no liability to either the landlord or the tenant. Most of the decisions made and actions taken under these statutes are discretionary decisions for which there is immunity under the Maine Tort Claims Act.