I'm going to go with a dark horse and say Minneapolis-St Paul. 

Remember, Mortgages get sold to someone, and while it's a long custody chain with many "horse-swapping" in the mix, at end of day is the investor who is deciding where to plop down another few dozen million.

This seems to me to be a typical cart before the horse issue.

It is likely they will simply tell their atty they don't want to pay, he will say they're likely liable, but you are already demonstrating an unwillingness to litigate so the result is their direction to the atty will be simply stall and delay knowing that you're probably not going to sue...especially as you get deeper and deeper into this your resolve wears thin. 

All properties in CA now have to accept Section 8 but they stall everything.

. :-)One place had 9 dogs kept inside, goats penned on the porches, goats in a horse trailer and birds caged in the garage.

If there's a hole, it may be a red flag.b) sensitivity analysis: I examine all the assumptions, and make sure I can live with the worst case scenarios.c) "Stall and see": if they are getting money over multiple years, and there is no penalty for investing later, I would usually wait so I get some real performance data, versus having to look at theoretical pro forma information.d) Recession stress test: I will not invest in anything, until I subject it to recession level stress and see if I can live with the result.

I wouldn't put the horse before the cart and I would save up for a downpayment.

But if they did then yes the deal would be stalled unless the seller can bond around the litigation which for 99% of sellers would be pretty much impossible.

This way you don't need any loans, you get to grow your equity/experience/income with every house, and the passive investors get your time/dedication/growing expertise/energy/and an inflation resistant investment. people want good investments, the Horse, but they mostly judge that by the earnestness/ambition/expertise of the Jockey. good luck :)