Arkansas Senate Bill SB644

Arkansas 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/14/25
• Refer: 4/14/25
• Report Pass: 4/14/25
• Failed: 5/5/25

Caption

To Amend The Law Concerning The Execution Of A Writ Of Possession; And To Allow For The Removal Of A Manufactured Home Or Mobile Home From Property That Is Subject To A Writ Of Possession.

Impact

The proposed changes introduced in SB644 mean that, once a writ of possession has been served, the defendants would be given a set timeframe—specifically twenty-four hours—to vacate the property. If the defendants fail to remove personal belongings within this period, local authorities will be responsible for assisting in the eviction process. Particularly noteworthy is the stipulation that if a manufactured or mobile home remains on the property after this period, the defendants must arrange for its removal within thirty days at their own expense. If they fail to do so, the court can classify the home as abandoned, further streamlining the eviction process.

Summary

Senate Bill 644 addresses the legal process concerning unlawful detainer actions, specifically focusing on the execution of writs of possession. The bill amends existing laws to facilitate the removal of manufactured homes or mobile homes from properties that are subject to a writ of possession. This legislative change is important in the context of addressing eviction processes and the rules governing property disputes in Arkansas. The bill aims to expedite the removal process, ensuring that the transition from possession to eviction is handled promptly and consistently under state law.

Contention

While the bill seeks to create a more efficient eviction process, concerns may arise regarding the potential impact on vulnerable individuals or families who reside in such manufactured homes. Critics might argue that the hastened eviction process could disproportionately affect those at risk of homelessness, particularly in cases where tenants may be unable to move their homes quickly due to financial constraints. The balance between the rights of property owners and the protections offered to tenants, particularly in the context of mobile home ownership, is likely to be a point of contention as the bill advances through the legislative process.