@Natalie Kolodij
It was hard for me to follow what you were saying, but your exemption may not apply to those deemed to be "dealers", I'd suggest you do more research specifically to your state exemptions.
The DF Act isn't the only issue, financial laws are intertwined among at least 50 laws, rulings, regulations, tax code and predatory dealing areas.
You can skip the Deals on Wheels book, it's along predatory dealing and financing, once allowed but now such is really something to avoid as the federal laws have teeth now.
As Michael mentioned, you're dealing in chattel liens with personal property unless the home has been converted to RE, not in your case if your homes are in parks.
The applicable laws describe properties as single family dwellings, 1-4 attached units as defined by HUD, it's irrelevant if the home is a MH or a stick built dwelling.
The occupancy is to defining the loan type, being a consumer loan for those owner occupied or commercial loans being non-owner occupied. The Act mentioned covers consumer loans, however other laws pertain to all loans.
The ability to pay is now a requirement pretty much in all lending, otherwise it can become predatory, what is considered predatory is not always logical and assumptions should not be made. Commercial lending does have less regulatory restrictions, but dealing at the small end of a commercial spectrum, between individual or small investors, the scrutiny is much greater too. It's not the wild west anymore where you can get away with anything one might dream up.
The SAFE Act was the first federal law passed concerning seller financed deals, I've been through tons of financial laws and I've never seen a specific investor type deal identified as they did mentioning "Lonnie Deals" as being predatory and the subject of specific legislation outlawing a transaction as explained in the Deals on Wheels book. The SAFE Act was later incorporated into the Dodd-Frank Act, so it's alive and well requiring compliance.
The guy you need to speak to, IMO, about MH financing is @Ken Rishel
who has a compliance operation specifically for MH dealers. There are differences for chattel liens and exceptions for dealers.
Yes, one of the keys to the DF Act being applicable is that the security for the loan is a lien on the property, that can be a bit misleading if you take a security interest in other personal property to secure a loan that facilitates a home purchase that would otherwise be covered. Language in the DF/SAFE Act specifically includes any method or system used to circumvent the intent of the Act. So, taking a security interest in someone's car or boat or fur coat, which is still a consumer loan arrangement may be seen through quickly and see the ploy as a means to circumvent the intent applicable to a home purchase transaction. It's simply best to comply, use a RMLO and keep everything above board.
On another note, if you get a heck of a deal on a MH and you sell it at it's near true market value, (MHs having a book value) then you'll be fine doubling your money. The rub comes in as predatory dealing id the price is over its market value and is then seen as a premium paid for the financing arrangement, that can be predatory lending.
Lease-options are also included if credits from payments made reduce the sale price, you're still financing the sale, regardless of what stripes the agreement has.
Frankly, you're in a heck of a rental market, I'd probably not consider selling. I do understand the issues of maintenance with a MH and that may not be passed off the a tenant in any residential lease, so I understand the benefits of selling.
As to your park owners requiring the occupant being an owner, why not sell a small % of ownership, have a repurchase agreement allowing you to credit that agreement and file for a new title? That can put someone's name on the title, show that to the park manager, they can't argue with being in title for occupancy requirements. No financing is necessary. In fact, if your % of ownership is reasonable, then you could assign or split maintenance issues, your tax accountant might pull their hair out dividing depreciation, but if they have an ownership interest, they can pay for repairs. IMO
I believe Ken R has a newsletter too for MH dealers, might be a good idea to take that to keep up with the regulatory issues dealing in MHs, I would if I did.
Good luck. :)
