Companies typically have business models which of course are not set in stone, however, changing the way a company operates should not be imposed by a single client simply because it works better for them and not the management company.  

Why not simply find a seller that will sell their property at 70% and forget a 30% carry back?

Simply, sell.

Wouldn't you rather avoid the claim in the first place along with the time and expense, increased insurance premiums, being limited to surplus insurance carriers etc. rather than absorb claims simply because you have an entity? 

Have you talked to the tenant and simply given him the option of breaking the lease?

Okay so am I hearing both of you correctly that it would be best to simply sell even for a loss vs. holding it and renting it?

Show people what the investment looks like over the life cycle otherwise people simply don't have enough information to go off of.

When there is a recently acquired long-term rental, lenders can simply throw in the lease agreement and use 75% of the rental income from that, but on a short-term rental, there is no lease agreement, so the only way to document what the actual cash flow is, is by using Schedule E of your most recent tax return filing. 

If we could afford the price point in our local market we would stay in the Southern California market but its simply too expensive. 

This would be very much like a borrower having the property rented at break even.So in short, a LO simply saying "he wouldn't finance" without running full credit and verifying income would be short sighted, in my opinion.July 3, 2022To Whom It May Concern,On November 14th, 2018 one of our holding LLCs, [LLC Name Redacted], entered into an agreement for sale on the property at [Address Redacted].