Sorry about that, I tried to err on the safe side by not putting words into your mouth--only err on the wrong side anyway.

Above all else, be conservative and err on the side of lower estimates than higher.  

I typically err on the side of over improving rather than not but never to the point where I price myself out of the market.

Ah, so you're saying that someone bought the property using the *wrong name*, and that name happened to be the name of your client's company.So, your client has absolutely no relationship to the property, other than the fact that the deed/title is erroneously in his company's name.Is that what you're saying?

When analysing a property, best to err on the side of caution.  

No.BTW:  Your judgement that I am closed minded is just as erroneous as the assumption that I believe all wholesalers to be shady and dishonest.

It could be argued that by not mentioning an agent at all, the landlord is automatically taking on those roles, but I believe it is safer to err on the side of redundancy to satisfy the regulation.

All this talk about the Landlord Tenant Act with regard's to the poster's liability is utterly erroneous, as there are issues of surety, guaranty, and statute of fraud at play. 

Tenant pays for erroneous service call fees, you also charge them $35 for taking bs calls.I have a 21 page lease that ready like the devil wrote it, but these are my top hits.

When evaluating a property for purchase you incorporate the vacancy as an expense against the annual projected gross rent roll to offset erroneous income calculated by multiplying the monthly rents by 12.Hope this better answers your question.