I'm still in the process of finding an alternative solution but I thought I'd leave this here as a warning for others looking to make a decision.For reference, I'll just post their email response to me here:As we review your inquiry, we would like to remind you of the following key points from our Terms of Use:In no instance shall ShinePay be liable for any of the following:"Lost revenue from service interruptions.Lost revenue stemming from delays, malfunctions of any product.unauthorized gains access to your account or due to shared passwords or if your password is hacked.Destruction to properly, places, or personal injury resulting from the installation, misinstalling, or misuse of any product.Lost revenue from entering the wrong account number for ACH or other bank transfer or money transfers or due to any delay in receiving funds.Damage to your structure, machines or car resulting from use or installation of our products.Any funds collected that are paid to a person that does not own the property.Any harm from defeating the lock and technology that controls the lock to a device.Failure to properly service any product or machine."

Did you get any updates on rent control?

Since you can't control the sale price, you basically have a $4k cushion to your reno costs, or otherwise you lose money compared to the as-is scenario.

You have zero control over the stock market, whereas when you do private lending, you have significantly higher control and contractually guaranteed return on your money.

(Starbucks / yoga studio / craft brewery /boutique cookie,coffe or ice cream shop  are the easiest targets)-Activation of dormant retail sites-Increased foot traffic For B to AAbove also apply-Home valuations (are homes in the increasing at rates above nearby or similar neighborhoods)-Is it walkable or are projects in place to make it highly walkable for residents-Is it near highly desirable activity centers -is it unique (for example - Can it get historic designation)

In CA currently only MF properties are rent controlled.

@Eric SmithGenerally, if the taxpayer sells the relinquished property to an unrelated party, the taxpayer generally cannot acquire replacement property from a related party unless:The related party is also participating in a 1031 exchange.The related party pays more in tax on the sale to the taxpayer than the taxpayer is deferring in the exchange (this scenario is rare).Let’s look who is considered a related party: Spouse, children, grandchildren, parents, and siblings.Corporations and shareholders owning more than 50%.Commonly controlled corporations.Partnerships and partners with more than 50% interest.Trustees, grantors, and trust beneficiaries.Non-Related Parties:In-laws.Aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces.Friends.Domestic partners.Entities owned 50% or less by the taxpayer or a related party.In your case, your mother-in-law, aunts, and cousins are not considered related parties to you under the definitions in Sections 267(b) and 1031(f).

I wasn't skeptical at first because I control who I decide to rent my property to. 

At least we don’t have rent control and it’s in the IL constitution that rent control is illegal otherwise Chicago would for sure have it by now.

You have more control of your time when working with sellers as opposed to buyers.