that not mentioning in the contract/anywhere else, at all, that they charge something for coordinating vendors - while, in fact, take ANY undisclosed compensation (and, incidentally, do not provide invoices as a matter of policy) - is compliant with TREC.It gets better: I recently had a local RE attorney, who allegedly deals with many major local PMs, claim to me that, even if there is no prior disclosure by the PM that the PM charges anything for dealing with vendors, as long as the PM tells the principal the total cost, and the principal agrees to it - before the vendor does the job - this is compliant with “annotated” (the lawyer’s stipulation) 62-12-312(b)(17).If you missed it: A local TN- and MS-licensed RE lawyer claims that no disclosure of the PM taking any cut is necessary - as long as the principal is told the job’s total ahead of time, and agrees.I have no idea where this lawyer happened to find any annotation like that for 62-12-312 - I did not, at least not in Westlaw at my law library.And this “industry standard” (attorney’s words) appears to be in serious conflict with the actual law, as far as my non-lawyer reading of it goes:“(b) The commission shall have the power to refuse a license for cause or to suspend or revoke a license where it has been obtained by false representation or by fraudulent act or conduct, or where a licensee, in performing or attempting to perform any of the acts mentioned herein, is found guilty of:(17) Paying or accepting, giving or charging any undisclosed commission, rebate, compensation or profit or expenditures for a principal or in violation of this chapter;…”Literally right there: “… accepting or charging any UNDISCLOSED commission, rebate, compensation or profit or expenditures for a principal.”But it may not end there:If you add to the above circumstances that the principal began to suspect this (undisclosed) practice and asked the PM whether it engages in up-charging/marking up vendor invoices - and the PM denied it - and they continued to do business as before after that denial… until the principal obtained evidence, which only then forced the PM to admit the practice, somewhere in there a “mere” TREC violation seemingly becomes: “An intentional deception or misrepresentation made by a person with the knowledge that the deception could result in some unauthorized benefit to himself or some other person…” Commonly known as fraud, a crime.But I am not a lawyer.

Document everything.Every approval, notice, and inspection result is saved.This protects rent, prevents disputes, and makes future reviews painless.When Section 8 operations are systemized, rent becomes predictable and administration becomes boring, exactly how profitable real estate should feel.What part of the Section 8 process causes you the most friction right now?

To clarify, not putting 20% down causes one to pay PMI.  

The comprehensive financial modeling does more harm than good.

I would put it on the market with a real estate agent that normally sells rentals (and yours probably doesn't) and then deal with any related issues in the VERY unlikely event that unpermitted work caused me problems selling.

But not always (2013-2018).But since 2022, the Fed has been rolling MBS off its balance sheet, concurrently as it raised interest rates, to halt inflation (which it helped to cause).And it still owns an astonishing $2 trillion in MBS!

All the Metro Detroit Housing Commissions gave up requiring tenants to repair the damages they cause, found during Annual S8 Inspections and put that on the landlords. 

I expressed concern that doing so might cause the original mortgagee to be notified but I wasn't sure.

Where it is now could cause issues.You should change the listing to reflect that is is a studio and not a one bedroom. 

If a bad one slips through,  I get rid of them quickly.5) I got rid of stoves after one of the residents caused a stove fire.