My husband does agree with you as we really can not afford losing $300+ per month right now as we build our real estate portfolio.I completely agree that with already receiving money from the government that it would be more "fair" that she would have to be the one making the sacrifices to reflect the money she is receiving.

In that case, the title would need to reflect your personal ownership interest as well as the ownership interest held by your IRA.

If you research the comps, this will be reflected in the comps (the second part of the statement should be the takeaway). 

Ridiculous from my perspective.My properties are in NJ, but my mortgagee is in MI.I'm under the impression, a mortgagee can legally only demand the mortgage amount is reflected in the coverage. 

Can't blame them for trying.Your on the clock as the the 8th and most state laws require the tenants February rent be prorated to reflect that.For the water damage I would hold the tenant responsible for any deferred maintenance that damaged the property. 

@Nicolas Botia, this analysis appears to reflect if fully rented after you move out, correct?

Money will always be available but just more expensive reflecting the risk.

@Corby Goade said it poignantly.

Looks like this analysis reflects you living there (getting rent on 3 units) not after you move out (getting rent on 4)?

Somewhere between 25%-30% total will more accurately reflect reality.