In your instance the smoke and mirrors seem to be hiding fatal flaws in the deal.

Listing photos can often hide the true condition of the lot of things.Second is like Alecia noted: locals MIGHT know that the area is only going to attract subpar tenants.  

But suing someone is expensive and arduous (and she could very well just hide any previous calls to sewer companies and it would be hard to prove it).

When/if you go to sell it, you won't have anything to hide, meaning it can be appraised as a 3-unit, possibly commanding a higher price. 

Pictures can be angled such to hide the things that sellers want to hide. 

Preamble:  We don't announce that we are the owners, we don't hide it, but it never comes up.  

They settled for the $1 million.As to umbrella insurance being not relevant, I spoke to the owner a little later, he also thought the liability insurance was irrelevant little realizing that's what saved his hide.

But ya know who DOES.... ya know who IS in a position to be influenced and "bought", because there is another candidate in this thing who's not only VERY susceptible to such but tied at the hip to a person who's SOOOOO tied up in bribery and pay-off's that the #1 problem is actually solidifying the evidence because he's so damn practiced at it that even when it's glaringly OBVIOUS to all he still finagles ways to hide it all. 

Think of the various scenarios that could happen with someone hiding in a house deep within a residential neighborhood. 

From experience, a good number of those who apply without viewing the property tend to rush the process and may try to hide disqualifying factors.I recommend sharing your screening criteria and fees with prospects before arranging a showing/applying.