I'm thinking this must be a problem that isn't horribly uncommon.  

Now that I live in Denver's crazy market it's becoming uncommon to even see a 1% rule.

Also, the existing tenant quality varies and inherited tenants can be a gamble as you have not applied your own screening criteria or onboarding (in fact, existing tenants are not uncommonly part and parcel of why an owner is selling, due to payment or behavior issues)....Best of luck.

I haven't done any of the necessary math, let alone due diligence, at this point to determine whether it would be a worthwhile investment, but if this type of situation isn't too uncommon, I'll do some digging and post some details if you're interested.

It's uncommon, but there are some traditional lenders who are notorious for it.

I agree I would never let someone have possession of my house once I bought it without the proper leaseback agreements in place.All that said, I don't think it's all that uncommon to have a leaseback situation in a contract for a house sale.  

I am sure others on the forum will have suggestions.FCI issues you have had are not uncommon with them.

around here it isnt uncommon for a builder to have lots for a 2 year supply.

A 4/2 rental in that area is rather uncommon so I believe it would be at $800-825 a month.  

I don't see any harm in having one, I tend to think it all falls under the "EXERCISE COMMON SENSE" rule, but these days common sense is very uncommon.