Jeff S Na - I think you're defending doing straight loans rather than doing either (2) or (3).

As a HUD inspector I have to inspect those properties that are boarded up and have been destroyed with the scrappers and squatters.I will defend Detroit and I will also rip on Detroit.

Foreclosure sale: HOA was one of the defendants which has unpaid dues.

As Mother always said, "Not all lessons are learned in school" @Simon Lloyd Council has informed us that with the bank would not be able to defend their position the property is a rooming house given the facts of the lease and the attestation from the City by-law officer.

Long story short, there was a $1M verdict against the defendants, all of which was covered by insurance.I would say the LLC worked because there was zero consideration given to suing the passive owners of the property who had nothing to do with the management or operation of the property.

I currently work for an apartment management company and I’m about to go to Champions Real Estate School for my real estate license.

To that extent, the mortgagor essentially subordinates their right to defend title to the property.

And, contrary to what you may have heard, as long as I do not engage in illegal discrimination I am NOT required to follow the exact same process with each applicant.It makes it much easier to defend against a claim of illegal discrimination if I take the exact same steps, in the exact same order with every applicant, but that is all it does.As for the 'trick' of putting a name at the top of the application list, in the real world of lawyers and discovery, that fig leaf won't protect anything.The best way to not be successfully sued is to treat people the way you would like to be treated.

Why are you defending someone that is trying to skirt the letter and intent of this law?

Anyone can sue anyone at any time of course, but I've seen time and time again where people have sued an LLC and the officers in the LLC and the judge throws out the officers as defendants because the complaint is against a property owned by an LLC and there is no valid reason to include the officers.