As a side note, those of the "sharing" generation will get first hand experience as to why their parents don't house hack when they get their first tenant that uses the tenant laws to violate the lease, not pay the rent, destroy the property and remain in the property without paying rent for an extended period of time. 

But she couldn't afford her partial rent and destroyed the place - $12k in damages alone.

No destroyed property to repair.

It's very easy for a tenant to destroy carpet in one year, but wear and tear on hardwood doesn't look as bad.

Or he can spend the same time frame receiving certified mail and having public notices taped to his door only to destroy his credit for 3-7 years.If I were in his shoes, this wouldn't be a difficult choice.Good luck!

There will always be bad tenants, and I believe that a good tenant screening can filter out 99% of the types of tenants that destroys homes.  

What these guys are saying is that as a result of a rule that made sense in a different era under different circumstances someone is knowingly going to pull the trigger and unnecessarily destroy over $100 billion in capital.So even though these properties are healthy and performing excellently, they will be destroyed.I am so very glad that I am now a retired banker, as I cannot see myself in good conscience functioning in a climate where a sub mediocre bureaucracy blindly enforces a rule because it's there.

You need to know they have the capacity to pay what is due even if they are friends, that can destroy friendships.

He has had it sitting for the last 9-10 months since the last family he had in got in paid one month and destroyed the place. he was renting at $1,000/month but does not know how to screen.

The agent that even if they rented it as is, its condition is so poor that any renter would destroy it further.