I was not aware that if there was no 'release' that a tank could be left in-place, washed and then abandoned with with fill / foam inside.I get that regulatory agencies are unlikely to say there will never be any 'liability' but it sounds as if the closure report / 'no further action' letter stands as comfort to the (new) owner and any lender that the issue has been fully addressed.Oren

Full disclosure our house buying company wholesales hundreds of properties a year but i advocate that if you are to wholesale properties that they should be required to be licensed just to bring some regulatory oversight and make it just a smidge harder for people to get started.Our wholesaling company is working really hard to grow large and train our client buyers and sellers to expect more from their wholesaler then "buyer beware" and a bunch of weasel clauses for sellers they are getting now.For instance:Every seller knows we are wholesaling  and is given the option to list the house with us at a higher priceWe guarantee our ARV and rent comps to our buyersWe own a construction company as well so we KNOW our rehab numbers and adjust quickly as prices adjustWe still take $3-$5k non refundable (unless we cant get clear title) from buyers and i know thats a source of contention for BP but as a business operator those deposits protect our sellers and ensure that whoever puts the money down is ready to close then. 

Very few hard money lenders will lend to an individual for regulatory reasons.  

Banks do not extend credit to anyone for nothing.To charge a fee on an existing loan, the lender will need to obatin consent of the existing borrower and the new borrower, that is not a problem, but it means technically, another closing.There are also what are called "compensating factors" these are issues surrounding the loan that either make the loan stronger or less with less risk or goes the other way, with more risk.There are many reasons for a lender to say no, could well be that the lending portfolio of a small bank is booked up and is not making additional loans or extending credit and if the term and amount are already mixed into the portfolio and offset by reserves and other investments, the might not be in a position to extend that laon amount.Each insured lending institution has a "written loan policy" which are the rules that management has set for all loans to be made and not following these rules is a violation noted by regulatory officials.

Alternatively, they could try to sway the regulatory environment that makes it difficult for small businesses to compete by increasing the cost of entry into the market. 

Even though I don't live there... all of my investment properties are in Texas... mainly due to the regulatory/business climate.

That being said, the situation you have described sounds a lot like a regulatory taking.

I'n hoping against hope that there will be changes made in CA leadership to bring some more middle of the road policies back, and get out of the race to always be the most regulatory stringent state, as they're just adding more costs to housing. 

I have 3 of my unites under section 8 and I am about $500 below the marketHere is the text on the billHousing restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency, or other recorded document as affordable housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, or subject to an agreement that provides housing subsidies for affordable housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code or comparable federal statutes.

That is certainly not happening here in Upstate NY, yet we have a lot of the same regulatory BS coming hard and fast at us.