@Allison Panila Based on pure speculation, it sounds like the LL imposed the extra $50/month in the hopes that it would cause the tenant to want to leave.

I invest purely based on cash flow (after initial investment, typically positive cash flow every year). 

Then it's hard for the defendant to claim that they didn't receive ANY of them.But purely sending an email is not "better" proof anywhere else other than in your head.

There are FTHB goodies in CA, but if you own residential real estate (including if it's a pure investment property) they generally go away because you aren't a FTHB any more. 

I think it would take me about two weeks of diligent searching to grasp a certain market - but I would need the help to discover recent sales, etc..It’s a treasure hunt; fun, exhilarating, and pure American Dream stuff. 

If it is purely about the numbers you use for every other property... allocations or %'s are the same, I don't see how you can't use that logic here. 

Yet, the most recent ones were more than double and it was a pure profit grab.

The interest rate doesn't look bad considering it's purely an investment property.

For what it's worth, it will not be our primary residence until years down the road depending on how things go (when we "retire"), but it sounds like, regardless, we should steer clear of both options (LLC and fancy self-directed IRAS) unless we want the LLC for pure liability peace-of-mind if we did somehow rent out the land or a structure on it (if it wasn't our primary residence).Thanks again for taking the time to reply, still figuring it all out and this really helps.

The large banks will often have their own overlays which are more restrictive than the pure fha regulations.