Now, I am working in 2 hospitals, and an imaging center, super~busy and loving it, AND in my off time, I am studying to get my RE license again (It lapsed).

The time-lapse only goes through 2018 and there was a large amount of development in 2019 and 2020.

I'm am okay with noncompliance until the 11th (or whatever exception you want to make for a later date), but as soon as that exception date lapses, I'm at the court house the following day....clear/fair structure and accountability.  

The owner I worked for just ended up paying their hotel bill and one lady's carpet, rather than fight with them.So, based on my experience dealing with tenants who didn't have renter's insurance - even after we explained why they should and put it in the contract - yes, absolutely, I'd require them to carry it.And at least that way, if they let it lapse, they will at least have a memory of having it, and making the decision to let it go.  

That way you wont have any lapsed time for that valuable knowledge you will likely never use to fall out of your skull.  :-)Good choice with Micki, shes great!

I seriously doubt I could kick out a tenant for letting their insurance lapse (and frankly not sure I want to). 

Our board just let our FHA approval lapse, right after we put it up for sale.  

wohoowhen we went into court both parties was able to speak. we pointed out what was going on with the eviction and why. the judge didn't care about what was happening with the house because the claim was for lapse of time.

I dont always act on the notice right after it lapses but if i need to, the notice has been served as early as possible.

Last thing you want is for a policy to lapse and your tenant burns it down.