The noncreditted offerings are almost universally much more expensive, have a lot less variety to choose from, and many times have almost no skin in the game from the sponsor.Thankfully there are more and more nonaccredited offerings coming out and the competition is starting to force them to reduce fees.

Also, it's not uncommon for tenants to complain about things only after they run into difficulties themselves, e.g. being delinquent or late on rent, as  way to somehow "justify" or balance out their transgressions.As irritating as it is the way  they chose to complain, you have to consider their complaints to determine if they are legitimate or just overblown and unreasonable.

This was the same math done when you purchased the triplex, if you purchased it as an owner occ and used the rental income to help qualify.3) If you want a rational reason why non-owner occ math is more generous than owner occ, consider that non owner occupants have to put big fat down payments down, and have more skin in the game generally. 4) Rental income (anything about it) is frequently overlayed. 

Or would it be better to show my "skin in the game?"

It really depends how much "skin" in the game your tenant has!

Underwrite to the IRR - it requires projection of cash flows and liquidation.

Go be dull somewhere else but now in my forum.You're gunna need thicker skin than that to succeed out there.

Make the tenant/owner have skin in the game.  

We all have to be true to ourselves and I'm comfortable in my skin and it seems you both are also.

For instance, if I manage to raise private capital to fund a deal and purchase a successful rental property, how would this actually benefit ME when I have no skin in the game (i.e. money of my own invested)?