Basically they named the price that they want to walk away from closing with and expectation is I cover the net difference.My question is this: while I am pretty certain that the closing costs will comprise of the typical costs (attorneys fees, title fees, etc), should I be protecting myself from any unknown closing costs that may be a surprise when I get to the table, by way of language in our written contract?

What are ways to protect against the risks?

Of course the road commission governs the street and the first 10 feet or so of your property, so no matter what the city and the utility company have protected themselves.

I'm assuming the bank still has the right to foreclose.There may be numerous reasons why he would have transferred the property, but would protection from foreclosure be one of them?

And the answer to that is we will definitely make sure we are both protected with a contract."

Just wanted to know if this makes these properties risky or if I could protect myself by making a statement in my offer that the tenant must sign a lease upon closing (or the owner must present an up to date lease).

http://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/311/topics/99080-how-do-you-protect-from-theft2.

SUCH PROVISION MAINLY PROTECTS YOU, FOR EXAMPLE IF THERE ARE LIENS AND THE BANK DOESN'T WANT TO PAY THEM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY THEM"If I were to believe such intent, than he is trying to say the price I put in the contract is "ALL INCLUSIVE" and will not pay any additional cost whatsoever...which does not make sense either, I am sure if I order an inspection, have the property surveyed, do an appraisal, have my attorney review and look at the title work etc...I will have to pay extra.

Adam,The common theme here is protecting yourself and your property.

The best liability protection is good management of the units, not entities, the rely on insurance, if those are sufficient you should never have a problem in reality.