CA case law upholds that foreclosing lenders can't unwind a properly executed trustee's sale to a bona fide purchaser.

(1) An "act of equity skimming" occurs when:(a)(i) A person purchases a dwelling with the representation that the purchaser will pay for the dwelling by assuming the obligation to make payments on existing mortgages, deeds of trust, or real estate contracts secured by and pertaining to the dwelling, or by representing that such obligation will be assumed; and(ii) The person fails to make payments on such mortgages, deeds of trust, or real estate contracts as the payments become due, within two years subsequent to the purchase; and(iii) The person diverts value from the dwelling by either (A) applying or authorizing the application of rents from the dwelling for the person's own benefit or use, or (B) obtaining anything of value from the sale or lease with option to purchase of the dwelling for the person's own benefit or use, or (C) removing or obtaining appliances, fixtures, furnishings, or parts of such dwellings or appurtenances for the person's own benefit or use without replacing the removed items with items of equal or greater value; or(b)(i) The person purchases a dwelling in a transaction in which all or part of the purchase price is financed by the seller and is (A) secured by a lien which is inferior in priority or subordinated to a lien placed on the dwelling by the purchaser, or (B) secured by a lien on other real or personal property, or (C) without any security; and(ii) The person obtains a superior priority loan which either (A) is secured by a lien on the dwelling which is superior in priority to the lien of the seller, but not including a bona fide assumption by the purchaser of a loan existing prior to the time of purchase, or (B) creating any lien or encumbrance on the dwelling when the seller does not hold a lien on the dwelling; and(iii) The person fails to make payments or defaults on the superior priority loan within two years subsequent to the purchase; and(iv) The person diverts value from the dwelling by applying or authorizing any part of the proceeds from such superior priority loan for the person's own benefit or use.

But it is still a gray area with not a lot of case law and the difference between a transient and a bona fide resident is blurry.

Secondly, I'm learning that I'm actually more of a Private Money Lender than a "bona fide" Hard Money Lender.

If the BK13 was filed after the auction went through and there was a bona fide 3rd party purchaser, then the borrower has no standing in BK courts.

According to this website, they do "A right of first refusal in a lease gives a tenant a right to purchase the leased property if the landlord receives a bona fide offer to sell the property that the landlord wants to accept". 

@Ying Xu My understanding is that she doesn't need to sign your lease if a bona fide lease exists (even if its oral and/or MTM).

The "exception out" is this clause in state law: "The provisions of this section shall not be enforceable against a bona fide purchaser for value."

Apart from the fact that this sounds a lot more like a private equity structure than an institutional lender, it sounds like you're on the right track.However, generally an AM will need a bona fide, written offer from you to determine whether or not it is in his "kill zone".

So in addition to a certification of commercial loan, doing the loan through an LLC is another indicator that it's a bona fide business/investment purchase instead of an owner-occupant type situation.That aspect of LLCs and hard money lending / real estate investment does not vary state-to-state to my knowledge, because the consumer protection laws involved with owner occupant loans were enacted on the Federal level after the financial crisis.