Inflicting harm on others is unnecessary, especially in such a simple situation as this.

Also as noted, nonresidential contract-for-deed sales are entirely exempt.DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTAssuming that the residential transaction involves a “multiple seller” and the lawyer/real estate broker exception does not apply, the statute imposes a disclosure requirement somewhat similar to the condominium/townhome disclosure statute. 

On an occasional basis when it makes more sense to sell it to a correspondent as opposed to selling it directly to FNMA we would have to adhere to the overlays imposed by Wells Fargo for instance on the same conventional loan.

So, in other words, I think its adding unnecessary complexity at this point.

It's hard to see those self-imposed limits until someone points them out. haha.

I asked my question because I wanted to ask a realtor friend of mine and didn't want to be imposing on our friendship without knowing if there was anything in it for her. 

If you are lucky and have lots of properties, for instance we get checks almost every time we visit the post office- you can look forward to standing in line- every visit.So prior to imposing a new rule or requirement- know the mail arrives, the post man prints a slip, puts it into your mailbox telling you of mail waiting for you at the post office, and now you get to wait in line for the mail he could have delivered when he delivered the notice...

I'd keep a close eye on them to make sure you don't incur unnecessary losses in the future.

There is actually some CA case law that came out of Santa Barbara several years ago having to do with munis imposing codes that limit the number of "unrelated" people living in an SFH.

DF imposes regs intended for institutional lenders on seller financing.