I see this occur on both spectrums:I see this very often during due diligence, where an investor will either perform a Google search thinking they know some statute or some law, then proceed with trying to fade the bid - even though the seller has had an attorney on the case for the past six months and can confirm there are no issues.

I had a similar issue with a tenant.

What other scenarios could I possibly run into besides property value decreasing that could cause issues?

If so, she shouldn't have any issue.

As I reassessed and refined my operations, I am about as passive as I should be, spending about 1-4 hours/month dealing with landlord issues.

I've got a decent network in Chicago already, and it would just take time.The end game would be to not work for anybody but myself, and turn, say $800k into retirement money 10 years from nowAJ - the issue with recapturing, is that in order to pull enough equity out of this existing home, I'd need to make X amount working a sound job in the city.

I lived there for 3 weeks and then had to move back to Fredericksburg VA for a multitude of family issues.

And a local attorney is good to have in your rolodex anyway for future issues that may crop up.

They are getting what they really want, and you are crafting the deal to where it will still make sense for you.One potential issue is if what is most important to them is most important to you as well.

In my case, I made sure everything had a full rehab after we bought so that the number of issues would be relatively minor, and it turned out that way.