Also, observe their compliance with other terms of the rental agreement.

You are bound to observe your obligations you are not bound to enforce your rights so it is not a dichotomous situation.Apart from that I agree with you.

I think that's who I observed handling some cases while I was there last week.

Yes, probably.These are just observations, this is not legal advice. 

It is about an employee who witnessed an incident and had to testify on what she observed.  

What I often observe and hear from people is that you can anticipate having it rented between 100-150 nights a year.

I have personally observed fire scenes in which a standard interior bedroom door kept a room from getting destroyed while the remainder (outside of the closed door) was heavily damaged.

It's amazing to me how many people don't think about this and how many houses we see with water issues that are so obvious on what's causing them.So, because you've ALREADY experienced issues, this may be a solution.A more comprehensive deal of digging down, putting in drain tile, perhaps a vapor barrier on the outside, would be a 'next step' in my opinion.IF you are selling and need that 'comprehensive' thing as a selling point, I might consider going further, however if you are holding for awhile and can observe results I'd go with my original recommendation. 

Yes, banks should add back depreciation to income calculations.A couple of observations though....The 15 year verses 30 doesn’t show a lower net income, as the added principal payments aren’t a deduction....it raises it, lower interest payments verses a 30 year.When renovating vacant properties to place them into service as rentals....the costs get depreciated instead of expenses, so you shouldn’t have large write offs in the beginning.

Thanks for your observations.