If Congress had meant the \u201cduty to serve\u201d to be optional, it would not have called it a \u201cduty.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0The dictionary definition of a \u201cduty\u201d has \u2013 at its core \u2013 a mandatory<\/em>\u00a0responsibility.\u00a0\u00a0And Congress is presumed to use words according to their ordinary and customary meaning. But nothing in the FHFA rule would\u00a0require<\/em>\u00a0Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to do\u00a0anything\u00a0<\/em>to support MH chattel loans \u2013 not even a \u201cpilot program\u201d (more about that in a moment).\u00a0\u00a0So the \u201cduty\u201d instituted by FHFA is not really a \u201cduty\u201d at all, but a choice left to entities that have steadfastly refused to provide secondary market support for MH chattel loans \u2013 which prompted the \u201cduty<\/em>\u00a0to serve\u201d in the first place.<\/p>\n If all this sounds familiar, it should. It mimics HUD\u2019s \u201cinterpretation\u201d of its statutory \u201cresponsibility\u201d to appoint a non-career administrator for the federal manufactured housing program as \u201cnot mandatory\u201d even though Webster\u2019s says it is.\u00a0\u00a0But HUD (and maybe now FHFA) has gotten away with it because much of the industry plays along.<\/p>\n It\u2019s hard to see, then, how a non-duty which leaves Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac free to ignore the 80% of the manufactured housing market represented by chattel placements (not 70% as reported elsewhere) lives up to the directive of Congress.<\/p>\n While it\u2019s\u00a0true that FHFA\u2019s final rule leaves the door open just a crack for chattel, rather than slamming it shut as it did in its proposed rules, what does this\u00a0really<\/em>\u00a0do for consumers and an industry that needs competitively-priced and readily-available chattel financing in order to reach its full potential?<\/p>\n DTS was enacted by Congress\u00a0nine years ago<\/em>. If either FHFA or the Enterprises were really interested in MH chattel financing, there has been plenty of time to do the groundwork and obtain the necessary loan performance information.\u00a0\u00a0There has even been time for a \u201cpilot program\u201d or two over the last decade<\/em>.\u00a0\u00a0No, instead, we\u2019re supposed to take it slow, with a non-duty \u201cduty,\u201d while consumers are needlessly herded into higher-cost loans, paying more than they would\u00a0in a truly competitive financing market not distorted by official discrimination that would be unacceptable in any other context.<\/p>\n![\"DutyToServeManufacturedHousingMMarkWeissJDPresidentMHARR-MHProNews-\"](\"http:\/\/www.manufacturedhomepronews.com\/industryvoices\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/DutyToServeManufacturedHousingMMarkWeissJDPresidentMHARR-MHProNews-.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
![\"MMarkWeissCEO-MHARR-ManufacturedHousingAssociationforRegulatoryReform-posted-IndustryVoices-MHProNews\"](\"http:\/\/www.manufacturedhomepronews.com\/industryvoices\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/MMarkWeissCEO-MHARR-ManufacturedHousingAssociationforRegulatoryReform-posted-IndustryVoices-MHProNews.png\")
<\/p>\n