The bad part is that they have 3, 5 yr old black labs.

Just one option, but it might take a lot of work to make it happen and all parties have to believe in the venture.I would not suggest that someone obtains a loan and passes it on to another just because of the goodness of their heart.

In my book, a deal is defined as a situation where both parties benefit.

He is very ethical and deals fairly with people and is careful to abide by the law (CA.).Paul Galasso seems to be a pretty up standing guy as well and he's in WA. state.Don't sell your soul to any Guru.

The reality is they can do it “within reason”... that hard part is to establish what is within reason...They may be getting ready to sell the building or something...

If the contract says seller pays for title insurance then seller pays for title insurance.When you assign a contract, you are no longer a party to the contract and normally would not pay for any closing costs.

Nevertheless, I find it very troublesome the feds can push to modify existing, legal contracts because one of the partys is having problems.

The party giving away ownership is the grantor (they are granting title) The party receiving ownership is the beneficiary (they are benefiting)I know others have different views on the protection (or lack there of) a land trust may or may not provide.

Eventually I won eviction, but came home from a business trip to find she'd thrown a wild party, passed out, and her "friends" walked off with all my stuff.

I really believe in being ethical where all parties involved come out in a win-win situation.