For example if you do not have a strong personal credit, or a storng business credit score, you are gonna need collateral.

Having an ownership interest in the collateral held by a lender does not creat an obligation to them and they can not hold her to the obligation, therefore, they can't insist that she suffer any loss arising from the debt.That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

The point being is that this is an example of banks throwing their weight around for additional protection and reducing risks that they have jistorically accepted in disposing of other collateral, they don't like they fact that so much money is being made from their lack of oversight, management and adminstration, they will accept profits from actual work and improvements being done, but not simply from them being inept.

If the lender/servicer forecloses on the note, then there is no more note (because they now have the collateral that was securing the note).

I'm sure collateral helps too.

Does anybody know of a good read to better understand cross-collateralization and blanket mortgages?

This would be using either a blanket loan w/ several properties as collateral, or a single-house loan.

But, if Ky walks up to me on a property I own and wants me to finance 50% and get a loan for the balance, Ky is going to need some strong financials, possibly other collateral, a track record of management as well as a good credit history and cash flow shown off the deal.

If you don't have collateral, then there's nothing to loan against or to mitigate the risk of the lender.Do you have an income stream?

Are there any usury laws that are applicable, some states have usury laws on residential properties regardless of it being owner occupied or not.They also have collateral issues with "junk houses" frankly, banks can take a bath from foreclosures on some 20K house, who would buy it?