In 1976, the Board became concerned about the increasing controversy as to the authority of a federal savings and loan association to exercise a "due-on-sale" clause - a contractual provision that permits the lender to declare the entire balance of a loan immediately due and payable if the property securing the loan is sold or otherwise transferred. 2 Specifically, [458 U.S. 141, 146] the Board felt that restrictions on a savings and loan's ability to accelerate a loan upon transfer of the security would have a number of adverse effects: (1) that "the financial security and stability of Federal associations would be endangered if . . . the security property is transferred to a person whose ability to repay the loan and properly maintain the property is inadequate"; (2) that "elimination of the due on sale clause will cause a substantial reduction of the cash flow and net income of Federal associations, and that to offset such losses it is likely that the associations will be forced to charge higher interest rates and loan charges on home loans generally"; and (3) that "elimination of the due on sale clause will restrict and impair the ability of Federal associations to sell their home loans in the secondary mortgage market, by making such loans unsalable or causing them to be sold at reduced prices, thereby reducing the flow of new funds for residential loans, which otherwise would be available." 41 Fed.

If something had to be adjusted, I would say a slight rent reduction may help, as rents are well above what most locals can afford, and as some people (and its not many) are forced to move back to the cities they moved here from, the demand for rentals is still high but the number of people with the ability to pay the higher prices is reduced.  

The actual numbers are most important in that it must show the cash flow I am looking for, it must have at least one large upside potential (rent increases, vacancy reduction, add income sources, divide & conquer, etc), and it must be good enough to pass the lender's criteria (dscr, cash flow, etc.)

I.E. the bank carries 60% debt and seller carries 20% debt on an 80/20 loan but at that point there is little to no net tangible benefit to the buyer trying to get a seller carry for down payment reduction). 

While there is a cost, the reduction in stress from having to manage a property to me is well worth the cost that I pay my property manager.

Hi Tim,There is a ton of competition where I'm at, too, but there is still plenty to go around, especially if you are consistently making offers.I go after the properties that have been sitting awhile with no price reductions, and have been getting some really good deals this way.

at 20$ down payment you would need to request a 30k reduction in the price...

You'll be able to see how many days on the market and if there were any price reductions. 

Add to that a job loss or reduction in your own income.

Consider it a $10 or $20/mo discount on their rent and a reduction in hassles for you.