You might want to read our series about “How to Screen a PMC Better than a Tenant”, since selecting the wrong PMC is usually more harmful than selecting a bad tenant: https://www.biggerpockets.com/member-blogs/3094/91877-how-to-screen-a-pmc-better-than-a-tenant-part-1-services-and-processes

Then a person must be harmed.

You can still see the bullets holes in the wall and the substance the police used to dust for prints covering the interior.Anyone have experience/or advice dealing with this?

Not everyone agrees that they're harmful, but when I drive under them, my radio gets static.8.

No harm, no foul, no goverment funds, no loss of receipts of any bank. :)

You might find yourself creating a situation that looks okay on paper but gets overturned in an audit because it lacked economic substance (substance over form).The IRS would likely challenge the use of multiple entities and an ESOP.Once upon a time you could donate a property to the fire department to burn down, take the donation and essentially have a property that was demoed and ready to rebuild.The bottom line is that many of the choices that might have changed the outcome today have already been made.

No regulator is going to get involved in some one time transaction unless some harm was caused.

(I think the customers can see through it)With that said, my company does a very good job marketing the properties, but I am looking for something new and innovative I can offer my clients that has true substance and is not just fluff.

Tenant shall not place any hazardous, dangerous or toxic substances or materials in household trash for collection.

My depression is not debilitating to the extent that I ignore hygiene...but it has reached the point where it's too difficult for me to be productive (working towards my degree, carrying out my responsibilities as an instructor), and sometimes thoughts of harming myself, hence the needing to leave.