I have a deposit, so I will be out one month's rent.Now comes the kicker.

I don't see why I should need to get this signed by the seller, as they didn't tell me about the taxes, and provide clean title.I have a clause that reads:"Unless otherwise stated herein, or as otherwise provided on an inspection addendum attached hereto, Buyer shall have the option of inspecting or, obtaining at Buyer's expense, inspections to determine the condition of the Property.Seller agrees that in the event Buyer determines in its sole discretion that the Property is not suitable for its purposes, Buyer may withdraw this offer to purchase at any time, and the earnest deposit shall be returned to buyer, upon the sole demand of buyer to the title company."

Basically, you deposit your money with them, and then you borrow against that deposit.

If it is during the move-out inspection I take it from their deposit.

Then I find a tenant buyer deposits 3% option plus first and last months rent.

With that said, I plan on "living" in 1 unit to take advantage of a low deposit and lower insurance rates.

The one application we got has individuals with bad credit so I am a the crossroads of the following option:Do I rent to those individuals with bad credit BUT require a larger deposit?

We purchased a building in Jan with a bad tenant in Chicago, IL.The previous landlord had a simple 2 page lease without information about security deposit, etc..Now that tenant is suing us for not disclosing where we kept the security deposit funds among other items of missing paperwork found in ordinary leases.

that would be you unless you still have something like a security deposit from the tenant.

I recently purchased a property where a tenant says her deposit was a much larger amount than the seller says it was.