Seems a tad excessive to me; I believe typical (for those who actually have them in their lease) is 3 days. 

Once you have paid off the homes, the excess net cash flow should be enough to self-finance each property's "uh oh" fund and give you access to some of the cash reserves for expansion of your portfolio.

A landlord shall not demand or receive as a security deposit an amount or value in excess of two months’ rent. 2.

I do it this way since it's easier to keep track of the reserve balance, If not I'd have to run a report to determine what's excess cash flow versus reserves and deposit if all funds were in one operating account

If you have some eligibility remaining but not enough to finance the whole new property then you have to pay 25% of the excess in the form of a down payment.

Personally, I don't want tenants that don't keep the utilities on (cleanliness, frozen pipes, excessive humidity, etc.), so I don't mind wrapping these costs into the payment...

$500 a month for 5 years equals $30,000 negative cash flow but my appreciation on the 3 has been in excess of $250,000!

I usually refer them to a local RE agent, give them a link to a FSBO site, or show them how to collect excess proceeds after tax sale etc.

Hello everyone,I have read many posts .. if not all for the last month or so .. but still quite not comprehend why banks are listing REO properties at market value ( at least in State of California ) eventhough I have seen some of these properties had defaulted loan amount plus the added costs of junior liens and legal fees included .. still much less than the listing price.In California, is it true if the bank sell the REO properties above the default loan values + legal costs and junior liens .. the excess amount will go back to the original mortgagor ?

it may be nice year over year as it helps cover your excess rents, but when you go to sell you have to pay that all back at 25%.