That is very jurisdiction-specific, but I believe most Courts are allowing people to "cram down
" the value of RV's and mobile homes that serve as the debtor's residence as long as the property is not actual real estate
In my jurisdiction, I filed a Chapter 13 and set up the Plan to pay the lender $10,000 since that was the value of the mobile home in which my clients resided. The creditor filed an objection and said the debtors needed to pay the entire $30,000 balance since the mobile home constituted property which was their principal residence and thus the value reduction was inappropriate in light of the anti-modification provision found in 11 U.S.C. §1322(b)(2)
The Court ultimately sided with us since the mobile home was not actual real estate (but rather was located on a rented lot). The Court implied that if the mobile home had been permanently attached to real estate, it may have ruled differently.
Hopefully Florida has a similar take on the issue, but if no one has litigated it there yet, then you may have to.
In my argument, I referred to Tennessee, which looked at the situation in depth. I wrote:
"The United States District court for the Eastern District of Tennessee has also looked at the issue of whether mobile homes are subject to cram down. In In re Shepherd, 381 B.R. 675 (E.D. Tenn., 2008), the debtor (Shepherd) financed a mobile home with EMC Mortgage Corporation. Shepherd ultimately filed Chapter 13 and sought to cram down the mobile home in her Chapter 13 plan, to which EMC objected. The Shepherd court stated “…many other courts have considered the issue, and the majority of courts have found that the statutory definition of ‘debtor’s principal residence’ in §101(13A)(A) does not alter the requirement of §1322(b)(2) that the property in question be real property. E.g., In re Gearhart, No. 07-70232, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 4281 (E.D.Ky. Dec. 14, 2007); In re Logan, No. 07-70212, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 4280 (Bankr.E.D.Ky. Dec. 14, 2007); In re Fuller, No. 07-81703, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3765 (Bankr.M.D.N.C. Nov. 2, 2007); In re Oliviera, 378 B.R. 789 (Bankr.E.D.Tex. 2007); Herrin v. GreenTree-AL, LLC, 376 B.R. 316 (Bankr.S.D.Ala.2007), aff’g In re Herrin, No. 06-12249-WSS-13, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2333 (Bankr.S.D.Ala. July 3, 2007) (en banc); In re Bartolome, No. 07-10731-DHW, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3263 (Bankr.M.D.Ala. Sept. 21, 2007); In re Rivers-Jones, No. 07-02607-JW, 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2992 (Bankr.D.S.C. Sept. 4, 2007); In re McLain, 376 B.R. 492 (Bankr.D.S.C.2007); In re Manning, No. BK 07-70190-CMS-13, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2595 (Bankr.N.D.Ala. Aug. 2, 2007); In re Coleman, 373 B.R. 907 (Bankr.W.D.Mo.2007); In re Cox, No. 07-60073, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 2218 (Bankr.S.D.Tex. June 29, 2007); see also 2-101 XXXXX XXXXX Collier, collier on Bankruptcy P 101.13A (15th ed.2007). But see In re Fells, No. 07-80559, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN 2007 Bankr.LEXIS 3748 (Bankr.W.D.La. Oct. 23, 2007); HSBC v. Lunger, 370 B.R. 649 (Bankr.M.D.Pa.2007); In re Kenneth, 373 B.R. 46 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 2007). This court finds itself bound to follow the majority.” Thus, the Shepherd court found that only real property which is the debtor’s primary residence is protected from being crammed down."
I hope this helps and a positive feedback is always appreciated if this was useful to you.LEGAL NOTICE: I am only licensed to practice law in certain state(s) and I cannot give legal advice to someone who does not reside in a state in which I am licensed, nor shall anything I say in the above answer or elsewhere on this site be deemed legal advice, even to someone who resides in a state in which I am licensed. Fees I receive for answering questions are paid for information, not for legal advice. This forum is designed to provide general information only, and information herein is not warranted to be correct or applicable in any way since laws may have been misinterpreted herein, since laws change from time to time, and since the impact of those laws on any particular situation varies. The information presented in this site shall not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of an attorney-client relationship. Persons accessing this response are encouraged to seek independent legal counsel in their jurisdiction for guidance regarding their individual circumstances. Do not take any action or inaction based on information presented herein since it is informational and may not be accurate or applicable to you; it merely attempts to give you a basis of knowledge to help you formulate questions to ask a legal or other professional in a face-to-face meeting in your jurisdiction. Joseph Ross does not hold himself out to be a specialist or expert in any area, regardless of assertions made by any third party, and any implication of being an expert or specialist herein is made in error. I hope the information presented above is useful to you. Answer above is (c) Joseph Ross. All rights reserved.