However the only reason they say it's 'valid' is because they got a quantified valuation out of it; it apparently doesn't matter to them whether it's a value that can be trusted.I've since submitted a civil complaint to magistrate court to try getting my money back from the bank.

Although transferring ownership is a violation of the convents of most mortgages or deeds of trust, this is a civil matter; it is not in any way illegal or criminal.

If Bill refuses to pay it, that's a civil matter between them and you shouldn't get involved.When the lease is up, the deposit is refunded to the Tenants on the lease.

Even so, it would be prudent to turn it into your insurance carrier as you are obligated to notify them of possible litigation, even if it's not unlikely to go anywhere.

Her response was, 'It has taken me years of fighting with zoning, litigation with the city to learn where you can and cannot STR in this area.

What I find (In PA) is that criminal and especially civil (evictions etc) ARE properly recorded and available on the STATE courts website but often times not picked up by background checks (mostly the evictions).

It's funny that every leader in this country from Fauci to Powell is running very fast to ruin the civilization LOL

California released the new Civil Code 4741.

I’ve certainly learned a lot about people in your profession, Bob - way more than when I wrote the first post.By the way I researched the guy a little bit and found disciplinary action by Real Estate Commission for “Substantial and willful misrepresentation, misleading or untruthful advertising, improper fraudulent or dishonest dealing” leading to a civil penalty in the state of Tennessee plus a pending lawsuit for something else unknown.

Rather than go to war with costly litigation, consider an alternative that goes like this:The parties agree to accept appraised value as the valuation method The parties agree to who selects the appraiser and agree to split final appraisal costs The first appraisal comes in at a value that is acceptable to the first party but doesn’t meet the approval of the second party The second party chooses its appraiser and the parties still don’t agree on value The parties agree at the outset that if neither parties appraised values are acceptable to them, the first two appraisers select a third appraiser and agree at the outset that the valuation of the third appraiser is final Basically this approach to setting value has been called “my appraiser, your appraiser,Their appraiser Best of luck sorting this out