:)Appreciation is the gravy, it should not be the meat in an LO installment sale.To have a lawful and enforceable LO, the option price must be stated as to as a known value, saying the amount remaining due on an underlying mortgage on some future date is not an amount certain and is only set based on future requirements being met by the seller, as their obligation, which is another kicker to toss out a LO as there can be no expectations required by the seller and changing the type of contract.Investors really need to stop reading guru books on LOs and getting their plan off the internet, RE is local and laws are changing, seems like every week.You can't simply read a statute or regulation and take it in black and white as there is the intent of the law, the purpose, how it will be interpreted and unless you have a legal background you are guessing and you'll most often lean toward what you want it to mean, no one likes to read "no, you can't do that".Then you have the risk and reward analysis, slightly out of compliance with a great reward or way out of compliance with a small reward, is it worth it?

There's plenty of services like this:http://www.languageline.com/solutions/interpretation/personal-interpreter/but the best way if you aren't going to have a property management company is to network with other Real Estate Investors and find someone who can translate for you.

Dawn,I re-read the OP ... and maybe your interpretation was correct :-ORe-keying your properties to be the same, would be a bad move ... keying them to all be under a single master may have its merits.

My membership was cancelled this year and money refunded (only after many emails demanding my money back) because I am a 'Company' requesting work from other 'Companies' I read all the rules and there was only one statement in regards to this and it really is left open for interpretation.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that's true.Here's a link to screen capture of the relevant section of the addendum from my most recent purchase:http://imgur.com/oA0jr You can interpret the verbiage yourself, but here's my interpretation:- The allowed resale amount is not contingent on anything having to do with the rehab costs...it's fixed to whatever is filled in those two blanks spaces with "$".

Can someone help me interpret this?

Could be something state-specific, or a very wrong interpretation of the 4th amendment.

I also struggled to find a bank that interpreted this Fannie Mae guideline that would tie the rental experience to the person and not the property.

“You make money when you buy a house” could be either false or true depending on how you look at it and how you interpret it.

But the common sense interpretations of both statements put them much closer to deception than truth.Both in both personal and business dealings we depend on common sense interpretations of virtually everything said.