Note 18 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities	12 Months Ended
Oct. 31, 2012
Legal Matters and Contingencies [Text Block]	18. Commitments and Contingent Liabilities We are involved in litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, none of which is expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations, and we are subject to extensive and complex regulations that affect the development and home building, sales and customer financing processes, including zoning, density, building standards and mortgage financing. These regulations often provide broad discretion to the administering governmental authorities. This can delay or increase the cost of development or homebuilding. We also are subject to a variety of local, state, federal and foreign laws and regulations concerning protection of health and the environment. The particular environmental laws that apply to any given community vary greatly according to the community site, the site’s environmental conditions and the present and former uses of the site. These environmental laws may result in delays, may cause us to incur substantial compliance, remediation and/or other costs, and can prohibit or severely restrict development and homebuilding activity. We received in October 2012 a notice from Region III of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) concerning stipulated penalties, totaling approximately $120,000, based on the extent to which we reportedly did not meet certain compliance performance specified in the previously reported consent decree entered into in August 2010; we have since paid the stipulated penalties as assessed. Until terminated by court order, which can occur no sooner than three years from the date of its entry, the consent decree remains in effect and could give rise to additional assessments of stipulated penalties. In October 2012, we also received notices from Region III of EPA concerning alleged violations of stormwater discharge permits, issued in 2010 pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act, at two projects in Maryland; we are negotiating with the EPA a resolution of these more recent administrative proceedings that would involve our paying a penalty and agreeing to certain measures in order to comply with those permits. We do not expect the impact on us to be material. We anticipate that increasingly stringent requirements will be imposed on developers and homebuilders in the future. Although we cannot predict the effect of these requirements, they could result in time-consuming and expensive compliance programs and in substantial expenditures, which could cause delays and increase our cost of operations. In addition, the continued effectiveness of permits already granted or approvals already obtained is dependent upon many factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as changes in policies, rules, and regulations and their interpretations and application. The Company is also involved in the following litigation: Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc. and K. Hovnanian Venture I, L.L.C. have been named as defendants in a class action suit. The action was filed by Mike D’Andrea and Tracy D’Andrea, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Gloucester County. The action was initially filed on May 8, 2006 alleging that the HVAC systems installed in certain of the Company’s homes are in violation of applicable New Jersey building codes and are a potential safety issue. On December 14, 2011, the Superior Court granted class certification; the potential class is 1,065 homes. We filed a request to take an interlocutory appeal regarding the class certification decision. The Appellate Division denied the request, and we filed a request for interlocutory review by the New Jersey Supreme Court, which remanded the case back to the Appellate Division for a review on the merits of the appeal on May 8, 2012. The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages as well as treble damages pursuant to the NJ Consumer Fraud Act. The Company believes there is insurance coverage available to it for this action. While we have determined that a loss related to this case is not probable, it is not possible to estimate a loss or range of loss related to this matter at this time given the class certification is still in review by the Appellate Divison. On December 19, 2011, certain subsidiaries of the Company filed a separate action seeking indemnification against the various manufactures and subcontractors implicated by the class action.

Note 18 - Commitments and Contingent Liabilities

12 Months Ended

Oct. 31, 2012

Legal Matters and Contingencies [Text Block]

18. Commitments and Contingent Liabilities

We are involved in litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, none of which is expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations, and we are subject to extensive and complex regulations that affect the development and home building, sales and customer financing processes, including zoning, density, building standards and mortgage financing. These regulations often provide broad discretion to the administering governmental authorities. This can delay or increase the cost of development or homebuilding.

We also are subject to a variety of local, state, federal and foreign laws and regulations concerning protection of health and the environment. The particular environmental laws that apply to any given community vary greatly according to the community site, the site’s environmental conditions and the present and former uses of the site. These environmental laws may result in delays, may cause us to incur substantial compliance, remediation and/or other costs, and can prohibit or severely restrict development and homebuilding activity.

We received in October 2012 a notice from Region III of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) concerning stipulated penalties, totaling approximately $120,000, based on the extent to which we reportedly did not meet certain compliance performance specified in the previously reported consent decree entered into in August 2010; we have since paid the stipulated penalties as assessed. Until terminated by court order, which can occur no sooner than three years from the date of its entry, the consent decree remains in effect and could give rise to additional assessments of stipulated penalties. In October 2012, we also received notices from Region III of EPA concerning alleged violations of stormwater discharge permits, issued in 2010 pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act, at two projects in Maryland; we are negotiating with the EPA a resolution of these more recent administrative proceedings that would involve our paying a penalty and agreeing to certain measures in order to comply with those permits. We do not expect the impact on us to be material.

We anticipate that increasingly stringent requirements will be imposed on developers and homebuilders in the future. Although we cannot predict the effect of these requirements, they could result in time-consuming and expensive compliance programs and in substantial expenditures, which could cause delays and increase our cost of operations. In addition, the continued effectiveness of permits already granted or approvals already obtained is dependent upon many factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as changes in policies, rules, and regulations and their interpretations and application.

The Company is also involved in the following litigation:

Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc. and K. Hovnanian Venture I, L.L.C. have been named as defendants in a class action suit. The action was filed by Mike D’Andrea and Tracy D’Andrea, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Gloucester County. The action was initially filed on May 8, 2006 alleging that the HVAC systems installed in certain of the Company’s homes are in violation of applicable New Jersey building codes and are a potential safety issue. On December 14, 2011, the Superior Court granted class certification; the potential class is 1,065 homes. We filed a request to take an interlocutory appeal regarding the class certification decision. The Appellate Division denied the request, and we filed a request for interlocutory review by the New Jersey Supreme Court, which remanded the case back to the Appellate Division for a review on the merits of the appeal on May 8, 2012. The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages as well as treble damages pursuant to the NJ Consumer Fraud Act. The Company believes there is insurance coverage available to it for this action. While we have determined that a loss related to this case is not probable, it is not possible to estimate a loss or range of loss related to this matter at this time given the class certification is still in review by the Appellate Divison. On December 19, 2011, certain subsidiaries of the Company filed a separate action seeking indemnification against the various manufactures and subcontractors implicated by the class action.