I explained that I was aware of the due on sale and had the funds should the lender elect to exercise that option, but planned to be upfront and was relying on them to prepare the paper work, whether it be a limited POA, disclosure letter, etc to the lender.  

I simply see it as an exercise in RE.

,I'd modify that to say that conveying title to your entity without the full sale and transfer opens the possibility of the lender exercising their rights under Due-on-Sale.

Regarding things that aren't written, you're not exposed legally but it allows the person you're dealing with to exercise actions that may better his position on your expense since there was nothing in the contract that had explicitly explained the situation.  

The fact that the tenant exercised their option much quicker than you thought/planned is part of the explanation of your intent. 

It seems like it is an exercise in language and at the same time getting the message across.  

Been awhile since I watched it, but it's a great exercise in thinking outside the box, and answers the people who look down on salesmen. https://www.ted.com/talks/rory_sutherland_life_les...All my best to you! 

As the author said several times (i am paraphrasing), "if it were true that you could buy some 'system,' pill, or speed 2 minutes a day on a particular exercise machine, each one of us would be real estate moguls, stock market millionaires, and have abs of steel."

Although if the house we have a bid on doesn't go through, it might be a good exercise to see what that right of way is worth to her...

I exercise.