I just remember thinking that the Rochester inspectors seemed a little too strict, interpreting every rule as harshly as possible.

“Blue State landlords are using the Govt to strongarm the tenants to make more money…”I interpreted that you thought LL were pushing the politicians into these laws.  

Surely there be some attorneys or title issuers with this interpretation?  

Again, i might be wrong but I've done my fair share of transactions across dozens of states (NY included) and a seller concession has always been interpreted as a seller's contribution to the buyers closing costs or principal purchase amount. 

Like other posters have mentioned - it will likely vary by lender - but generally most states will be OK with either Individual or LLC but there are a handful of states that due to various regulatory interpretations will require a LLC (or require a LLC to have prepayment penalties on the loan structure) Borrower = Individual or Entity AL, AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, HI, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY Borrower = Entity only GA, FL, IA, MT, RI, VA (1-4 Units) Prepayment Allowed Vested Entities Only IL, NJ

@Ryan Lee I mean, "significant" is a little open to interpretation but the rates/pricing will be different. 

The council and those behind the threat of suit differ on interpretation of protections to a hospice.

The first thing that us non-lawyers need to understand is that this is an open interpretation document.

First you have to interpret things accurately.

However, after the assessor's visit, they concluded it wasn't covered, interpreted the terms and conditions differently, and I received no payout.