Through various court battles and decisions, Jerry established the principle that due-on-sale clauses were an unreasonable restraint on alienation of property and therefore unenforceable, thereby enabling many sellers of homes to retain their homes and sell them, rather than lose them to lenders in foreclosure. 

This may be a good solution for you but be sure to understand the law and operate it properly so you don't lose the protections afforded.Most investors I deal with own the property in their own name.

There's always a fine line between over-contacting them and annoying them and backing off too much to where they either lose interest or find some other buyer.

My parents didn't want to risk a partially completed project on their property that wouldn't generate any income for years if it ever came to that (such ventures come with high risk).This approach might be common in real estate (understandable from the point of view of the developer).

., right, but then I lose financing options as Fannie and Freddie do not allow banks to lend to LLCs.

You could have an 8% CAP rate property that loses money if your financing terms are bad or down payment is low.

The properties cash flowed about $1k per month.Last year, which is 14 years later from his purchases in 2004, he had to move out of his apt because his rent is now over $4k from his original $2k per month.His CT Properties cash flowed the same for the last 14 years, about $1k per month.BUT... if you considered that his rent moved up another $2k more in rent, the over all effect is that he was losing money.He is also effectively priced out of NYC and moved to a lower cost area in NJ.

Is it an area you would venture to if the numbers are "good" or potentially "good" -  There is a 4plex am looking at there (2 beds 1 bath in each unit) - but the property is in pretty bad shape (foreclosure- fannie mae) - I have it under contract but still doing some additional due diligence.

To avoid losing their credit rating they signed the property back deed-in-lieu-of. 

Also, in a mainstream asset class like value-added multifamily, I see no reason to take a risk on a sponsor that doesn't have full real estate cycle experience and didn't lose money.