I think that even well-capitalized landlords should not have to bleed to maintain that situation.Aside from this, and generally speaking, I think that a hands-off government that allows free competition and does not grant bailouts in any sense, just keeps the infrastructure and common defense, is better than one that intervenes.

There are thousands of posts here about monetary loss and injustice, little about what we can do given our jobs as real estate owners and less about what others have had to endure.Income tax is taking of property, draft to military is taking of property, right now national defense act telling go to make ventilators is taking of property...I could go on.

However, this liability defense does not apply to third party claims for property damage or bodily injury.

I am not sure why you are so defensive.  

A few highlights from the single family lender letter published on 3/18, updated on 3/25:-loan can be primary, second home or investment property-servicer is not required to obtain documentation of borrowers hardship (only attestation)-insight into what payment deferral or loan modification options might look like after forbearance period (looks like there will be options to spread over 60 months)IMO, as landlords we should take both defensive and offensive measures to manage cash flow. 

Some good points on both sides, but my $.02 is take a step back and try not to get so defensive.....

Do we ask the Department of Defense to run programs for the Department of Education?

The only silver-lining is when I go to argue down my property taxes their defense of 'you got a great deal' is shot down when I give them the paperwork with the low appraisal. 

The lines of defenses I suggest using: 1.

I have few other facts to go on at the moment, but the notion that this may have been an act of self-defense is still tugging at me.