Based on you picture I would pass on that property.Stucco can have problems up front along with the brick veneer.Do not like all the stairs and double ups.Seniors will have a hard time renting and families do not like carrying items up and down all those stairs.That leads to tenant turnover and limited starting renter pool.The parking lot is thrashed.I also do not like the slope of that parking lot.Makes it very hard to pull in and out of there for traffic and makes it hard to get in and out of the car.To overcome all of those things a tenant will have to pay a way below market rent rate to deal with the inconvenience.Is washer and dryer in the units??

However, there are also lenders that will go below these amounts.

:)I see below that J Scott says the numbers didn't quite work.

And see below my post, my signature is perfect :).

You have to do that even with the long term tenants, and by staying just below market value you can tell them you are still offering a bit of a discount off of going rates.

Originally posted by Joel Owens:I like upping the rents slightly so that you get the increase but are still below market.Joel posted this on another thread and I wanted to ask for his rationale without derailing the other thread.

Throw in the below average credit and collections...

Another thought on this thread would be to prepare a comp workup of other similar properties in the neighborhood and show them how many days they averaged on the market for a standard sale.This way you can help the family decide if they are willing to wait to get a market offer or if they really need to liquidate the property to sell in less time.Additionally, I agree with the other comments, one quick sale below market will not create a market.

In case this helps I have a 762 credit score, below 25% DTI, make $70,000 a year, cash reserves of $50,000 and have already prequalified for refinancing with a portfolio lender.

If you can keep your units below 4 you can get better interest rates and thus increase your cash flow.