Actually, above that I'd love to see an opt-out clause if X of the raise goal is not achieved before closing.One may try to say it's a bait-and-switch of sorts, on risk levels, to close w/o the full funds IF the chances of quickly closing out the remaining raise are not realistic.

Such situations really irk me, which is why I decided to look into this further (and assume I have the right case.)My feedback remains to speak to an attorney.

Consult a Realtor, contractor, property manager, or lender, and then request referrals for the remaining three.

The deposit remains in place until they are out and is treated like a normal termination.About 90% of tenants pay the fee.

Prices will remain high as long as a lot of people are interested in buying real estate.  

So it remained as is. 

You can combine "subject to" transactions along with "contracts for deed" transactions to have the title and mortgage remain in the sellers name. 

So I just saw this post about Section 8 HUD tenants, and this post stated something along the lines of section 8 tenants being more likely to damage properties because they're section 8 low income tenants, and also something about investors not wanting to put money needed into Section 8 properties because they think they're just going to be ruined by these Section 8 tenants, and as someone who knows the entire process with investors, owners, contractors, tenants, and prospective tenants, this is what I have to say about it:In my experience, Section 8 HUD tenants are actually better custodians of the property because of many factors, but 3 of the main reasons being, there is an annual HUD inspection that is performed on each property, so this gives the owner an extra 'protection vector' against damages, also, the initial placement of a Section 8 HUD tenant requires a passing HUD inspection, therefore there's a record of the property's initial state prior to move in, and additionally, they want to have an easy renewal voucher process annually, and their unit remaining in good condition is an incentive for those reasons, therefore they are LESS likely to damage a property - their future depends on it!

While its new strategy is bold, it remains to be seen whether shifting focus to its core stores will be enough to compete with Spirit Halloween’s expanding presence and other retail giants.

Most likely: depreciation, with a 60% bonus depreciation upfront and the remaining 40% over 15 years.