[b]HELLO, I'm an attorney from Washington D.C. and I'm here to help you!
[/b](not!)
Actually, I like the SFAE Act, if only I could rewrite it a bit.
One, there would be no limitation on the number of loans an owner could do. Secondly, the license requirement for brokers would be a registration only. Since there is no one in HUD that can teach seller financing, they sure can't sign off on any instruction, which means the on going continued education for mortage brokers is worse than a Realtor requirement. It is what it is, an opportunity for state to generate fee income and allow the real estate education industry to gig you regularly for class fees.
I am all for the underwriting of seller financed notes. Such underwriting requirements are easily adopted and written to be followed. Counselling from a mortgage broker/lender group or a non-profit finance bunch concerning the borrower aspects would be good for those with low credit scores.
I would also be in favor of all seller financed notes to be foreclosed by judicial process. There is absolutely no reason why an eviction by a landlord should be harder than kicking out a non-paying homeowner!
Just having a judicial process for seller financed transactions would cut out most of the fraud and abuse and a judge could use several tools to adjust the transaction to be compliant, fair and equitable.
But while the SAFE Act was sold to us as a consumer law, I don't see it at all, it benefits the institutional lenders with the under currents from the wake of every paragraph.
