The prices may be quite a bit lower, so ask yourself why--one reason is that the dues, fees, fines, and assessments can/will be increased/added sometimes for reasons with which you totally disaagree, that might be harmful to your unit, and that you have no choice but to comply with.

You need financial flexibility to prosper in real estate and having lots of debt robs you of that flexibilityThen get into the habit of putting away about 20% of your take home pay.

I don't see how it would be retaliation, I am not trying to get even with the guy or anything, he hasn't harmed me other than just being a pest.

You got the signed lease,first, last and security..I see no harm in letting them move in 2 days early.

If it was a sex offense then having him go to properties solo again can be risky and possibly harm business.

You will hear some claim on BP, not Ken, that compliance is not required if the note predates the Act, not true in all respects.I can say that when a violation of law is discovered and the violator has then taken steps to comply after their discovery, there is an entirely different attitude taken by regulators, often to the point of no harm no foul.

Same with the lease, any co-habitant over the age of 18 must be on the lease.

It's not going to be an issue for most insurance agents because it probably won't get in the way of writing the business (unless it's placed with an insurance company that has strict risk inspectors).But if you're going to make an unfinished space habitable, including adding a kitchen, and you're going to get permits for the upgrades, I imagine at least some of the work will need to be inspected.

The more likely result from the lender's point of view is probably "no harm, no foul" unless there are larger problems with the loan (as someone else mentioned).

Well, no harm in throwing out a question and may be learn, if there is really such an option."