Although the numbers look better on the surface for these low cost homes, you end up with much higher expenses and more tenant problems.

The surface beneath the current floors is a concrete slab that looks like used glue to hold the parquet tiles down.

Every surface had to be touched.

On the surface I would walk from this deal.

One thing I've learned about this issue is to use a high clay based dirt packed against the foundation will minimize the freeze-thaw & torquing of settling, by diverting surface water from being able to cause these issues. 

On the surface , the properties in Seattle metroplex will not meet the 1% rule but dig dipper and you will find values.

On the surface this deal seems marginal at best, likely falling in the "not deal" territory and that is without considering how hard you would have to work to even make the deal happen.

@Daniel DietzYes to one.For two, fathers are disqualified parties but brothers and uncles generally are not deemed disqualified parties, so while it may be deemed aggressive, it is not prohibited on the surface if the father is  not the father of one of the sons mentioned and only IRAs and non-disqualified parties are investing.For three, it is similar to two except the father's IRA is removed from the equation, so it is not prohibited on the surface since brothers and uncles are not disqualified parties.However, under both 2 and 3 above, the IRS can always challenge both scenarios, and unless you can prove to the IRS that such transactions could have been made without the need of the other parties, they can still deem it prohibited.

To me on the surface, paying cash is the better option as I avoid paying any lending interest.....

If its less, then someone's equity is coming at your expense...The devil's in the details in these docs once you get past some of the basic surface numbers.