HB 797 would amend North Carolina’s Real Estate License Law to expressly classify residential property wholesaling and related transactions as real estate brokerage activity that requires a broker’s license. The bill defines “residential property wholesaling or related transactions” broadly to cover soliciting homeowners to sign purchase contracts, marketing or assigning those contracts or equitable interests, and dealing in options or contracts involving residential property. It also defines “homeowner,” “residential property,” and “soliciting” for purposes of the chapter.
The bill creates a new Article 8 in Chapter 93A, titled the “Residential Property Wholesaling and ‘We Buy Houses’ Homeowner Protection Act.” It gives homeowners a nonwaivable right to cancel covered purchase contracts until midnight of the 30th day after signing or until the deed/title is conveyed, whichever comes first. The bill requires specific cancellation disclosures in at least 14-point font, mandates delivery of an exact copy of the contract at signing, and requires refunds of payments within 10 business days after cancellation. Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive trade practices under Chapter 75, with private rights of action and Attorney General enforcement authority.
The bill’s impact would be to tighten regulation of wholesaling-style real estate transactions and expand consumer protections for homeowners targeted by investors or intermediaries. It would subject persons or entities engaged in these activities to broker-licensure requirements, create new disclosure and rescission obligations, and expose violators to Chapter 75 remedies, including potential damages and enforcement by the Attorney General. The North Carolina Real Estate Commission would be authorized to adopt implementing rules, and the act would apply prospectively to purchase contracts entered into on or after October 1, 2025.
Overall sentiment appears protective and reform-oriented, with the bill framed as a response to unfair or deceptive practices in the residential wholesaling market. The stated purpose is to address homeowners not receiving accurate information about fair market value or the solicitor’s financial incentives. No committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented debate in the supplied materials beyond the bill’s consumer-protection rationale.
The main point of contention likely concerns whether the bill’s broad definitions and licensure requirements could restrict legitimate investment activity, contract assignment practices, or other real estate transactions that some market participants view as lawful business models. Supporters would likely emphasize homeowner protection, transparency, and fraud prevention, while opponents may argue the bill could chill distressed-property sales or impose burdens on wholesalers and investors.
HB 797 would amend G.S. 93A-2 to add residential property wholesaling and related transactions to the definition of real estate brokerage activity, thereby bringing those activities within North Carolina’s broker-licensure framework. It would also add a new Article 8 to Chapter 93A establishing mandatory disclosures, a 30-day nonwaivable cancellation right, refund obligations, and enforcement through Chapter 75 unfair and deceptive trade practice remedies. The bill would affect homeowners, wholesalers, brokers, and the North Carolina Real Estate Commission, and it would apply only to purchase contracts entered into on or after October 1, 2025.
The bill is presented in strongly consumer-protection terms and appears to have a favorable or reform-minded posture toward homeowners. Its stated aim is to curb unfair and deceptive practices in residential wholesaling by requiring licensure, transparency, and a meaningful cancellation right. Because no committee discussion or vote record was provided, there is no direct evidence of organized support or opposition in the supplied materials, but the text itself suggests a policy choice to regulate the industry more strictly.
The likely controversy is over the bill’s broad sweep: it treats a wide range of wholesaling, assignment, and option-related conduct as brokerage activity requiring licensure, and it gives homeowners a lengthy, nonwaivable right to cancel. Critics may contend that this could burden legitimate investors, reduce flexibility in distressed-property transactions, or create uncertainty around contract assignments and equitable interests. Supporters, by contrast, would argue that the bill is necessary to protect homeowners from misleading solicitation, hidden incentives, and pressure to sign contracts without understanding market value or the consequences of the transaction.