I read my last thread response and I think I added the distinction b/c some banks will consider the seller-carried equity in a "CLTV" calculation as a rider to their LTV underwriting.

If you have figured out a way to buy properties (and make a profit) with out needing to perform this important piece of DD, I'd pay for the information.If a house is sitting on the MLS and it gets no bites it doesn't mean it's bad and just means know one sees the potential you see.There is a very important distinction between everyone else not seeing value where it is, and you seeing value where it is not.

That's the distinction you need to make.

@John Roberts: This is very gray transaction.. if you actually break the transaction apart (i.e. the sale of the property and the issuance of a loan) and have them as truly two distinct and separate transactions unrelated to each other, then you can do it. 

Not all states have the distinction.

There is definitely a distinction between the two. 

This is an important distinction as they are covered differently in the State's Landlord-Tenant Act for Mobile Homes.

Even if you keep the financial aspects of the transaction very distinct and clean, there could still be benefit if either party is enabled to participate in a transaction it could not otherwise because of access to the funds of the partner.

It also might not be a meaningful distinction, but my business is focused on buy and hold, rather than flipping, so I don't have plans to sell any of these projects in the next several years, although I likely won't personally occupy them.  

Is there a distinct line on when you have to do that (relationship with investor, amount of money, size of deal,etc.)?