Now, that said, the seller will likely be in violation of new laws, could be, which means that if they are (let's say you move in) then you'd be in a good position to destroy the seller from various angles later on.Yes, looks like they want $750 a month, that's probably more than rents for a 39K duplex.

Additionally, if you are in the right area, your competition is low due to the destroyed housing inventory.

PC just keeps on goin...I've had them driven over and knocked out of the (destroyed) steel frame, with barely a scratch; even shot at from a distance- no hole, not bent, just a "star" in the paint that was easy to touch up.

Professional chemical soil treatments create barriers - they're not designed to destroy the colony, but rather keep them at bay.  

If furnace breaks, air stops blowing, in a boiler, water can go anywhere and destroy anything it touches

It is one of those "up and coming" areas, but it yet has a long way ahead.I can rent it, but I am afraid the tenants will destroy it.

For you experienced landlords have you found that by putting nicer things in your home that it attracts a renter that is less likely to destroy your place?

(such as getting a title search)I would hate to have a property quit claimed over to me only to find out later that there is an extra 30k lien from a contractor for unpaid work.. or even a 2nd mortgage that wasn't disclosed.. so now you're on the hook for that as well and it destroys the cash flow you thought you were going to get.

I'm wondering if it would be more sensible to buy a quadplex close to UCF and be able to get $1,000 per unit in rent a month but risk the place being destroyed every year and high tenant turn over. 

Those that don't move on their own, don't destroy the unit on their way out, and are not followed by an eviction on their record.