What you seem to be considering is a short term purchase/financing arrangement (lease-option) for long term asset needs (buy-hold) which violates the first golden rule of financing assets, you need a long term financing arrangement to acquire for long term assets.Another point, with rates so low, they will be higher in 3-5 years.

This seems to be working out fairly well since the job provides some amount of steady income, but it's also a very flexible type of arrangement.

I'm scared that if I don't properly document the living arrangement with this 'stranger' I might run into problems.

I'm guessing it's finding a motivated seller, arranging a lease option, and then selling that lease option to a tenant-buyer who then does a lease option - and you make money for bringing them together.

I give applicants a 4 hour window after notifying them they have been accepted to respond and either get me the deposit or make arrangements to get it to me before the end of that day before I will give the house to someone else.I also require they sign an agreement that their deposit is a holding deposit until the lease is signed, and they forfeit 3.33% of the deposit per day the house is held if they do not sign the lease and take residency.

If you own it with your siblings it is best if you decide how expenses are split and put your arrangement in writing.

HAS PATIO AND COVERED PARKING.NEAR STERLING AND WINNER ROADMONTHLY INCOME OF $2000ASKING 110,000 Make offer.Possible financing.What I get from this is someone with a possible cash problem as the property has only been partially remodeled.Would a reply back be along the lines of a sweat equity arrangement?

The sale of the home is considered to be for health reasons if the taxpayer's primary reason for selling the home is to obtain medical attention (diagnosis, cure, mitigation, or treatment), or to obtain medical or personal care for a qualified individual suffering from a disease, illness, or injury.Unforeseen circumstances may include: an involuntary conversion (destruction or condemnation of home), unemployment, the inability to pay basic living expenses, or a change in living arrangement such as a divorce or legal separation or multiple births resulting from the same pregnancy, and other reasons to the extent provided in regulationsThe taxpayer's exclusion would have been disallowed because of the "more than one home sold during a 2-year period" rule, except that the taxpayer sold the home due to and of the three reasons listed above.The taxpayer otherwise qualifies for the sale of home exclusion, but there was a period of nonqualified use during which the home was not used as a principal residence (effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2008).Example: John bought his first home in 2003.

Alternatively, you could arrange an earn-out whereby you retain 80% - 90% of his portion of the the cash-flow-before-taxes (CFBT) until he has earned out your half of the property {this could be done even if there is an existing mortgage in-place}.Be warned that if you have a mortgage and your names are both on it, the lender (especially a bank) may force the remaining partner to refinance (rather than simply issue a "release" of the other partner from the mortgage).There are others here like Jon Holdman, and @Bill Gulley, who have deep experience and better know the financing options available to you in the U.S.A.Whatever you do going forward, spend a little time with a real estate / partnership attorney and get things in writing.

What you are trying to do has liability to a brokerage and a head broker will not want new agents working with this type of arrangement.