"lie with intent" is the distinction of course, I think by anyone standards legal or not, it would be wrong to lie with intent but with that said, proving illegal?

An important distinction.

Just because you never experienced something that is quiet real and possibly very dangerous depending on what type of entity you’re dealing with doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. 

People don't usually put up a "Beware of Dog" sign for no reason...they either think there's a potential for a bite - thinking that posting a sign will ease their liability in case of a bite, or animal control has mandated they must have the sign up (usually more than 1 though - here in Wilmington, you must have 4 in plain view) in the case of an animal being deemed potentially dangerous....also they told you outright they are planning on breaking your lease by half a year....may want to get the ball rolling on these folks.  

Note that in Philadelphia mortgage foreclosures are also conducted as sheriff sales, and the state laws and rules to be followed are quite distinct for those two varieties of sheriff sale.

I'm not investing, retired, but if I were, I would keep my powder dry for now.The other danger is relying on 2 high paying W2 jobs.

That is a distinction I could have gone my whole life and never missed. ;-) We can have lunch and I'll share the details. 

Comming out of school we think we now know everything, but in reality, we know just enough to be really dangerous.

That would increase the cash available for the all-cash investment and eliminate, I think, any danger of mortgage boot. 

That is going to push the 'danger zone' of hurricane damage further inland and leave beachfront even more vulnerable.