Also, note the "Related Discussions" at the bottom of the thread you started here.To answer your question... you need to define your market niche; establish your rental criteria; develop a good ad and info sheets; advertise on line and in other places that work for your area; be ready to field the calls/replies; tenant screen well with questions that will help you quickly sift out the rift-raft from the real contenders; be prepared to do full background checks... for rental history, income stability, credit history, and legal history.Also, if your properties have been sitting vacant for months, there is either a problem with the property or with the price.

My concern is the PM countered in a follow-up email in essence contends the damage is normal wear and tear and now the PM wants to send a garage technician to evaluate and provide estimates.

In fact, I pointed out several above.Do you still contend that no serious investors have multiple businesses?

There are not the massive commissions as he contends.

There are still behavioural quirks using the site via mobile with either the stock browser or chrome.The most difficult with which to contend is the floating menu bar ...

Now I also contend that cash offers happen more on lower priced properties, so move your target there.

There’s more details, (exterior bearing wall, roof of sunroom, rafter connections, etc.) to contend with in your circumstance than just a support beam. 

Tim is trying to evict a squatter where he bought a property that the previous owner contends was improperly foreclosed.

Without addressing owner financing, many in the House contended owner financing would become the ‘loophole’ for predatory lenders to continue their exploitative ways.

The case is REMANDED to the lower court for reception of evidence as to the amount claimed by the respondents for the preservation and maintenance of the property.SO ORDERED.Hence, the instant petition for review raising the following issues:ITHE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE RESPONDENT HEREIN IS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE AMOUNT USED TO PURCHASE THE LAND AS WELL AS THE COSTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOUSE, FOR IN SO RULING, IT INDIRECTLY ALLOWED AN ACT DONE WHICH OTHERWISE COULD NOT BE DIRECTLY x x x DONE, WITHOUT DOING VIOLENCE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROSCRIPTION THAT AN ALIEN IS PROHIBITED FROM ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP OF REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE PHILIPPINES.IITHE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN SUSTAINING RESPONDENT'S CAUSE OF ACTION WHICH IS ACTUALLY A DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN OWNERSHIP OVER THE LOT IN QUESTION, CLOTHED UNDER THE GUISE OF CLAIMING REIMBURSEMENT.Petitioner contends that respondent, being an alien, is disqualified to own private lands in the Philippines; that respondent was aware of the constitutional prohibition but circumvented the same; and that respondent's purpose for filing an action for separation of property is to obtain exclusive possession, control and disposition of the Antipolo property.Respondent claims that he is not praying for transfer of ownership of the Antipolo property but merely reimbursement; that the funds paid by him for the said property were in consideration of his marriage to petitioner; that the funds were given to petitioner in trust; and that equity demands that respondent should be reimbursed of his personal funds.The issue for resolution is whether respondent is entitled to reimbursement of the funds used for the acquisition of the Antipolo property.The petition has merit.Section 7, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution states:Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain.Aliens, whether individuals or corporations, are disqualified from acquiring lands of the public domain.