Consumers make the mistake of thinking that 4% is the interest rate and compare it to other interest rates; it is an upfront fee.Yes, it is very sneaky, but credit card companies are fantastic marketers.Also, the big thing with credit cards is what happens after the 0% period when you need to transfer again, and your credit is much lower than before.

My day job is very time consuming and I wanted a way to get into real estate investing that I could do on the side. 

She didn't think the case holds much water but it could be very time consuming resulting in high fees.

Also it appears the company they want to transfer the loans to I looked up on NMLS consumer access is not licensed.... 

(Please don't construe any contact info I provide as an "endorsement" or "recommendation.")Regarding the company your inquiring about, I've come across the following links - for whatever their worth (they may or may not be reliable):https://getoutofdebt.org/46215/saen-higgins-switch...https://getoutofdebt.org/36930/are-wealth-without-risk-informercials-an-extension-of-john-beck-tax-lien-systems-challenged-by-ftcIt's unfortunate that there is often an inverse relationship between (a) the amount of marketing an education/guru company does and (b) the actual value of the services provided.The initial sale made by such companies are really part of getting unsuspecting consumers into a sales funnel that leads to selling the consumer an education course for $10,000's.

Lastly, it could be that the bank is going to portfolio your loan at below-market pricing because they want the entire banking relationship (deposits, transaction processing, consumer lending, etc) or simply want the risk (yield).Lots of local and regional banks have been retaining loans at really aggressive pricing recently as the current environment makes this favorable for them.

They seem to Be priced as though they will never get consumed by the ocean even though every year some are. 

@V.G JasonThe great MJ DeMarco says that you should become a producer before a consumer, and your statement highlights what MJ says.

Without the SSN the ability of the CRA (consumer reporting agency) to cross reference information is hindered. 

If your objection is time, expense and compliance issues, it's not clear to me this alternative is less expensive or time consuming, and likely is even dicier on compliance.