I think @Brandon Turner's comment regarding talking about goals does have some merit to it.

It has its merits, but can often be lumbering.

I would judge each deal on its own merits including the worst case scenario.     

Given that $27,000 (plus legal costs of defense) are on the line, I'd spend $100 or whatever to get 30 minutes of time with a local, experienced, land lord/tenant attorney to lay out your facts and see if there's any merit to the claim. 

@Bryant Patterson , I see the merits of house-hacking (wish I had done it 35-yrs ago to jump start my net worth), and I've been thinking about it lots....advocating it for a niece and her husband with a new infant.

Being able to prove that the tenant transferred possession back to the landlord voluntarily (or through a completed eviction set out) will go a long way in convincing the court that such claims are without merit.

Or you could wrap a bond around it but bond company will go after you once the lien has merit.

Some people also deal with "sophisticated investors" as well -- people who are not accredited but can demonstrate a high degree of sophistication in real estate investing, such that they can understand the merits and risks of the transaction they are entering.Though the JOBS Act has thrown some wrinkles into this equation, to stay within the law, you must have established a "substantive relationship" with an investor before you can bring them a deal, and my understanding (which could be wrong) is that you cannot bring them a deal that you were already working on when you met them.  

Treat each deal on its own merits.

Rent would need to be $2500 to meet the 1% rule just to merit further scrutiny on a case by case basis.