Stay up to date on current News & Issues.
Pennsylvania offers property tax/rent rebate program for seniors
Falls to discuss proposed sewer lateral ordinance
County unemployment rate is so low, industries face a ‘labor shortage’
Upper Chichester meeting for Realtors®
Reports point to ‘vibrant real estate market’ in Montgomery County
A thousand new homes are planned next to Graffiti Pier
A recent poll conducted by the National Association of Home Builders and Wells Fargo highlighted the concern of home builders across the country over constantly tightening construction codes. It seems that approximately 35 percent of home builders recently polled are “extremely concerned” that construction codes are making new construction cost prohibitive “without a measurable improvement in safety or other benefits.”
Based on the stories we hear from our members on a weekly basis, I think it’s safe to say that home builders and REALTORS have much in common when it comes to feeling frustrated over building code creep. But while home builders are mostly concerned with codes that govern new home construction, our members must contend with the wildly inconsistent enforcement of building and property maintenance codes by municipalities at the point-of-sale (POS).
How difficult do some municipalities in southeastern PA make it to sell a home within their borders? According to our Realtor Association colleagues across the country, there are very few areas that face the same crazy rules and regulations regarding the sale of private property. So you want to sell your historic property in Caln Township? Better hope it meets the over-the-top standards of one of the strictest code enforcement departments in the region. Does your client live in Downingtown Borough? They may be required to replace the sidewalk, even if it’s only slightly worn. In Eddystone, be prepared for a team of municipal inspectors to descend on your client’s property on multiple occasions, and for those inspectors to find previously “missed” violations on follow-up visits. Are you selling a home to a rental property investor in Marcus Hook or Lower Chichester? That’ll be $5,000 to $10,000 for a new fire sprinkler system, please.
That’s the problem with the way municipalities are allowed to enforce property maintenance and building codes at the point-of-sale in Pennsylvania. While the state does have a “Uniform Construction Code” (UCC) in place for building and renovating homes, there is no such law that ensures a consistent standard for municipal home inspections. Worse yet, there is currently no fair way for home sellers or buyers to challenge an overzealous municipal code department that has decided to run rampant over their real estate transaction. When a township code inspector, manager or solicitor tells your client to “go ahead and sue us” if you want to challenge a particular demand, it’s all too clear that they’re holding the best hand.
So where do we go from here? The fact that we do have a uniform code in Pennsylvania for new construction gives me hope that a similar state-wide law may be possible for governing point-of-sale inspections. This type of law could include limitations on the scope of such inspections, and clearer guidelines for inspecting older homes. It could include strict limitations on the fees that municipalities can charge for such inspections, and set a stronger licensing standard for code officials. A ban on the absurd practice of requiring expensive infrastructure repairs – such as sidewalk and sewer lateral replacements – only at the point-of-sale would be a welcome addition to such a law. Finally, the law could set up a clear arbitration process – not controlled by the municipality or county – for instances in which home sellers or buyers feel the need to challenge a municipal code ruling without having to spend thousands of dollars on a lawsuit.
What are the chances of a municipal resale inspection law passing the PA legislature? With the UCC already in force for new construction, there is a strong precedent for this type of regulation. Is there language you’d like to see in such a law? Send your ideas to firstname.lastname@example.org
By Jamie Ridge, president/ceo, Suburban REALTORS Alliance
Here at the Suburban REALTORS Alliance (SRA) we’ve noticed a significant increase in REALTOR-awareness regarding municipal “point-of-sale” inspection requirements since the Marchlaunch of our “This Doesn’t Make Sense” campaign and website. This increased awareness has led to some very questionable municipal point-of-sale practices being brought to light by our members, and successfully challenged by the SRA.
In Chester County we learned that two boroughs – Phoenixville and Downingtown – were refusing to issue temporary use and occupancy certificates for required repairs that a buyer had agreed to complete after a sale. In both instances, the boroughs were in violation of the Pennsylvania Municipal Code and Ordinance Compliance Act (MCOCA), which states that: “a municipality shall not refuse to issue a use and occupancy certificate … on the basis of a substantial violation or require the correction of a substantial violation as a condition to issuing a use and occupancy certificate … unless the substantial violation renders the property unfit for habitation.”
After SRA staff reached out to each borough, they began issuing temporary certificates that allow real estate transactions to move forward.
In Delaware County, where the vast majority of municipalities have some form of point-of-sale inspection requirement, increased member input has allowed us to address Ridley Township’s refusal to issue temporary use and occupancy certificates for sidewalk repairs. Once again, township staff seemed unaware of the state law that requires the issuance of temporary certificates unless a property is being condemned.
Perhaps our favorite “success” story this year involves Suburban West member Nick Vandekar, who is also a member of the SRA’s board of directors. Nick was in the process of closing a deal in East Norriton Township in Montgomery County when their codes department mentioned a required sewer lateral repair and a hefty escrow requirement to allow a temporary U & O certificate.
Being quick on his feet, Nick was able to encourage a conversation between East Norriton staff and SRA staff. After being provided with an explanation of the enforcement tools that the Code and Ordinance Compliance Act provides to townships when home owners don’t comply with the terms of a temporary U & O permit, the township dropped their escrow requirement for Nick’s transaction, and future transactions. We think that is teamwork at its best!
The ultimate goal of the ‘This Doesn’t Make Sense’ campaign is to not only raise our members’ awareness of these issues, but also public awareness. By sharing the campaign website with your neighbors and clients, you can help us accomplish this goal. Once on the website – www.thisdoesntmakesense.org – guests can find information about the point-of-sale requirements in their municipality, and even send a pre-written message to their elected official about why these local real estate regulations do more harm than good.
When more of our local elected officials begin receiving these messages from residents of their townships and boroughs, perhaps they’ll think twice about introducing any further point-of-sale requirements. Even better, maybe they will strongly consider repealing inspection ordinances that are already in place.
After all, at a time when the economy is still recovering and home sales are just beginning to perk up, the last thing we need is more barriers to real estate transactions.
Based on a recent statement by President Obama and activity in Congress, it appears that Washington may finally be inching toward reforming secondary mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While very few elected officials and market experts dispute the need for reform, opinions of how it should be accomplished vary greatly. For future home owners and the REALTORS® who will serve their home buying and selling needs, the details of the final reform plan will matter a great deal.
To date, lawmakers in Washington appear to be aligning themselves with two different reform camps. The first, led by the president and a bipartisan group of moderate legislators, favors reforms that would significantly restructure the secondary mortgage market, while maintaining a critical role for the federal government. The second, led by conservatives in the House and Senate, would end the government’s long-time role as a guarantor in the secondary market altogether, leaving serious doubt that market liquidity would be maintained by private market entities during tough economic times.
The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) has stated its opposition to the latter reform plan in terms that are loud and clear. According to 2013 NAR President Gary Thomas, “NAR supports a comprehensive approach to restructuring the secondary mortgage market, including winding down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but believes any new secondary market entity replacing the enterprises must have an explicit government guarantee.”
Without that guarantee, Thomas correctly argues, the nation’s $10 trillion mortgage market could lose a functioning secondary market, leading to its ultimate collapse. The impact of that collapse would result in a dramatic destruction of wealth for middle class Americans that would see the value of their homes fall significantly. The lack of a functioning secondary market would also lead to mortgage rates that are unnecessarily high and unaffordable for many Americans.
While NAR does argue that a federal guarantee is a necessary ingredient of any successful reform effort, it also warns against a restoration of the old, broken system. That system, unfortunately, resulted in the creation of two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – whose shareholders pushed private profits without demonstrating any concern for taxpayer losses.
Rather than an attempt to “fix” Fannie and Freddie, NAR is recommending that the president and Congress work toward the creation of new entities that are government-chartered, non-shareholder owned, and subject to strong oversight that “ensures they can accomplish their mission and protect the taxpayer.”
Along with the top priorities of protecting taxpayers and ensuring mortgage liquidity at all times, NAR is advocating for the following:
The American economy and individual home owners have benefitted greatly over the past 70 years from the stable source of mortgage funding provided through the government sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let’s hope that their shocking failures, ultimately brought on by a harsh recession and too much focus on shareholder profit over taxpayer protection, has created enough urgency in Washington to introduce meaningful reforms that will help us avoid another such calamity.
The result of such a reform effort, if it can be accomplished by a Congress and president that haven’t proven their ability to accomplish much lately, would be a new and improved secondary mortgage market that could help sustain home ownership and the national economy into the distant future.
Jamie Ridge is president/CEO of the Suburban REALTORS Alliance