Seems like the husband is attempting to assert his rights over the property.

Your assertion was this doesn't hit your DTI which in and of itself is untrue.

The judge realized the falsehood right away and the court transcriber had an audible, uncontrollable gasp at the new assertion.

My understanding is that regulations were passed increasing the time for condo owners and HOA’s to assert material defects in construction.

My main point was don’t accept the Rich Dad assertion as TRUTH.

And that experience caused me to literally laugh out loud at Thierry's assertion that the EU has construction standards that make US properties look like shacks.  

I was hoping there might be RE accountant who could clarify.Also unfortunately, there're the usual suspects among BP syndicators who jump on every post mentioning K1s/syndications with their misleading assertions that K1 losses, including cost segregation, are deductible by passive partners.

Your words were as a lawyer is I look at case law and the case law does not support your assertion.   

Renee, I think you're doing just fine, and it's quite clear you are acting in a professional manner, not trying to establish a relationship with your tenants.I'm interested, however, in your assertion that it is a legal requirement in NH to send your tenants a certified letter when you assume the property.

On what data did you base that assertion?