But yes, if it's a 50-50 arrangement, your partner can hold you hostage forever unless your agreement has some kind of tie-breaking mechanism or other provisions that deal with the sale of the property. 

There is no lease involved in this arrangement.  

If damages are found that are the tenant's (or their animal's) fault, the tenant needs to make arrangements to pay you for them. 

@Robin ReeseBeware that some courts have held that these types of arrangements, if they don't work, require a foreclosure process if the tenant refuses to move or demands some repayment of fees they paid in.

At a high level, the transaction would look like this: Investor A loans money to Investor B from their SDIRA.Investor B loans money to Investor A from their SDIRA.Both loans have the same terms, backed by the real estate of each borrower.I have confirmed that this is type of arrangement does not violate the rules governing SDIRAs.Is anyone else in BP using this strategy?  

In my case, this risk control makes this type of arrangement far less risky than the typical mortgage (collateralize) loan.

Just trying to think of a fair arrangement.

It depends on the lender and the arrangement.

I would be happy to arrange a meeting for you if you are interested. 

Either type of lender could still say no to that arrangement if they wanted to.