Reason not to get SAFE Act (MLO) license?

I am considering to purchase 1st MHP in Indiana. The park comes with homes. I have been reading on this forum that most people would rather avoid activities that are affected by Safe Act.  I am wondering why investors are not interested in getting Safe Act (MLO) license.  For park owner who have many property managers, I can see that the costs can add up.  However, for investors who only have 1-4 managers obtaining license should be not too costly. Is the uncertainty that discourages people to put effort on getting license? In Indiana, the requirements to get MLO license is 20 hr training + about $150 fee + background check + credit check +exam. Annual renewal $50.  I thought this is not bad at all.  Do I miss something?

Read up on the Dodd-Frank requirements. You will be required to meet all of them, including the Ability to Repay Law. Getting the SAFE Act license is not the problem. Talk to your state MHA and, if you think it works for you, then get it. Everyone has to decide for themself.

I’m 90% sure that there’s 2 licenses for a park to be both the lender and originator.  You only surfaced the easy/cheap license.  You also are being the lender, being a bank.  This is the big issue.  Dodd Frank just offers an exemption for doing 3 per year… Rishel has a compliance program for parks.  I’m not shilling for Ken, just offering more study and possible solution. tactic I’ve heard of is related to the lease back scneario.  I don’t know of the company I heard of (I think) doing this for parks.