You could ask the sellers to remove the recourse after a certain number of on time payments as a compromise if they insist.

I'm aware of the Due on sale clause as well as making payments on the seller's mortgage.That's a simple and understandable compromise between seller and buyer in each of their situations, the investor wants to buy with as little money as possible and the owner wants to sell due to his current financial status (among other reasons) some sellers may not ask for anything out of the deal, some may even end up paying the buyer for whatever reason to have the house taken off of their hands.I am a reasonable guy but i will try to get the best deal for me as an investor and also make the seller feel that he has good deal as well.

So don't compromise.

Robert Adams I imagine he is concerned that if the bank sees it on the HUD it may compromise its closing.

Why not close immediately on the lot so you are in fact the owner of record, then send your letter explaining to the bank that their property encroaches your property illegally and you intend to seek remedies and that as a compromise, you will buy their property for x dollars and close by x date.

In the mix of searching for higher profits, ethics have been compromised in my opinion.And for your tv stat, I didn't look anything up but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the ones that watch the most are kids that don't go to school, kids in school, people 65+ or otherwise retired.

Yes you really want to get a tenant in, but don't let that compromise on getting just ANYONE in.

No amount of money is worth compromising my integrity by not telling the truth.Good Luck

As a form of compromise I've suggested that I would keep only 3 children (on a forum discussion board)...but that seems neither here nor there in this matter.

I can compromise somethings, like location and distance but not the opportunity to buy a house.