Immediately after I took over, tenants complained that there has been roof leaks that the owner attempted to fix himself, without good results.

Hmm if the buyer pays cash and intends to rent the condo, it seems like warrantable vs. non-warrantable becomes irrelevant; however, if the buyer intends to fix/flip the condo, I could see where it may become problematic because the next buyer may have difficulties getting a mortgage.

Immediately after I took over, tenants complained that there has been roof leaks that the owner attempted to fix himself, without good results.

To clarify, These properties are definitely worth buying because they make good fix and flips.

It doesn’t matter whose tree it is, period....when a tree falls whoever owns the property damaged by it is responsible to fix their own property, and for the clean up of the portion of the tree on their property.

I bought my first house (primary residence) in 2013, fixed it up while living in it for 4 years and sold it in 2017 for a decent profit. 

So my gut tells me this is not in a good area, it has a lot of deferred maintenance, and that you will be paying much more in the future to fix more issues like this.

It is fixed for the first five years but then adjustable for the next five with the balloon payment. 

I needed to fix this.

@Steven Pike Don't want you becoming an investor with every wholesaler, fix and flipper or realtor (nothing against either strategy, in case someone gets offended!)