Manufactured Home Is Not “Motor Vehicle” So Cram Down Of Secured Loa...

09/16/25

https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-30... 300w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-24... 240w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-76... 768w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-15... 1536w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-20... 2048w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-32... 320w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-16... 160w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-80... 80w, https://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/files/2025/09/Mobile-Home-2.jpg-40... 40w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" />

In re Thomas, Ch. 13 Case No. 24-10535-RMM, 2025 WL 1373615 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. May 12, 2025). Debtors’ Chapter 13 Plan proposed to reduce the secured creditor’s claim to the value of the manufactured home that served as collateral. The sole legal issue was whether a manufactured home that was Debtors’ residence was a “motor vehicle” for purposes of the hanging paragraph of 11 U.S.C. §1325(a). Debtors had obtained the loan less than 910 days before the filing of the Bankruptcy petition.

The Lender argued that the home was a motor vehicle and, therefore, the Debtors could not cram down the loan. The Court disagreed. “The definition of motor vehicle has two distinct parts: it is a vehicle that is both (1) ‘driven or drawn by mechanical power’ and (2) ‘manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways.’” See 49 USC §30102(a)(7).  A manufactured home does not fall within this definition based on the plain language of this statute. This conclusion was also consistent with all relevant persuasive authority. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration has also excluded manufactured homes from the definition of motor vehicles for at least 50 years. See, e.g., NHTSA Interpretation Letter to Constance Newman (Mar. 17, 1976), 1976 WL 533912, also available at https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/aiam2279).  

The Lender’s objection to the Chapter 13 Plan was, therefore, overruled.

Scott Riddle’s practice focuses on bankruptcy and reorganization. Scott has represented businesses and other parties in Bankruptcy cases for over 20 years.  You can contact Scott at 404-815-0164 or scott@scottriddlelaw.com.  For more information, click here.

[more]