- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
I am looking for clarification regarding the exemption and term “used as a residence”. Paragraph c states that any structure on residential property securing a loan located in a SFHA is exempt if it is part of residential property, is detached, and does not serve as a residence. In paragraph (3) I see that serve as a residence is defined, but I how do we interpret that? Is it saying if there is a bathroom, kitchen, or sleeping space, the detached building serves as a residence? Or is it saying the bank can determine for itself? The building in question is a cabana/pool house detached from the residence with a kitchen and a bathroom, with a roof and 4 walls. It appears that generally na pool house would be used while using the pool, but could someone live there, I would say yes.
I realize a bank can choose to require flood insurance on a cabana/pool house, but I am trying to determine the flood law requirements to assist in advising management.
(3) ‘‘Serve as a residence’’ shall be based upon the good faith determination of the FDIC-supervised institution that the structure is intended for use or actually used as a residence, which generally includes sleeping, bathroom, or kitchen facilities.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.