The house is getting attention because the previous owner is still living in it—and she refuses to leave.

Her name is Tori McMechan. She purchased the property in Nunn, Colorado, with her husband in 2006. After her husband died in a car accident, the property eventually went into foreclosure. McMechan fought the foreclosure in court but ultimately lost.

According to reports, she maintains that she has the right to remain in the property and says that whoever purchases the house will have to go through the eviction process to remove her. That could potentially put the new owner right back in court.

And that is where this seemingly inexpensive investment opportunity gets complicated.

The property is listed for $215,280 and is being marketed as an “affordable investment opportunity.” The listing even suggests that the price is so attractive that “if you blink it will be SOLD.”

Apparently, buyers have been blinking for months.

The property has remained on the market despite the unusually low price and enormous amount of online attention. The listing agent declined to comment but here’s my take.

You’re Not Just Buying a House

The biggest problem isn’t necessarily the condition of the house. It’s the person occupying it.

As an investor, I would look at a property like this very differently from a traditional buyer. I’m not simply buying real estate. I’m potentially buying a legal problem attached to that real estate.

I am not just purchasing a house—I could be purchasing litigation.

That is an important point.

If I buy a vacant house, I can generally take possession after closing, secure the property, begin renovations and start moving toward whatever my exit strategy is.

If I buy a house with an occupant who refuses to leave, everything changes.

I could potentially spend months dealing with attorneys, court dates, eviction proceedings and appeals before I can even get inside the property. During that time, I’m still responsible for the costs associated with owning the property.

Those carrying costs can add up quickly.

I’m talking about property taxes, insurance, utilities, interest or debt service, maintenance and potentially significant deferred maintenance. And that’s before accounting for legal fees.

This is one of the biggest mistakes I see investors make when evaluating a troubled property: they focus on the purchase price and renovation budget but underestimate the cost of time.

Time is money in real estate.

Financing Could Be Another Problem

There could also be financing and title issues.

A hard money lender may have little interest in financing a property where the buyer cannot immediately obtain possession. Even if a lender is willing to make the loan, the buyer needs to understand exactly what the title insurance policy does—and does not—cover.

Standard owner’s title insurance policies generally contain exceptions related to the rights of parties in possession. In other words, title insurance isn’t necessarily going to solve the problem of an occupant who claims a legal right to remain in the property.

That’s a significant risk for an investor.

Personally, I wouldn’t want to discover after closing that I had purchased a property where I couldn’t legally gain possession.

That doesn’t mean the property is necessarily a bad investment.

It means the price has to compensate me for the risk.

Sometimes the Headache Is the Opportunity

Not every investor would walk away.

A significant discount off the asking price could potentially provide give me enough room to absorb legal expenses, carrying costs and other unexpected expenses.

And that’s the key.

There is nothing inherently wrong with buying a problem property.

In fact, that’s often where investors make their money.

The mistake is paying a price that assumes the problem will disappear quickly.

If I were evaluating this deal, I would run the numbers based on the worst reasonable scenario, not the best-case scenario.

What happens if the occupant refuses every offer?

What happens if the eviction takes six months?

What happens if it takes a year?

What happens if there are additional legal challenges?

What happens if the house deteriorates while I’m waiting for possession?

What happens if I can’t get traditional financing?

What happens if the property needs significantly more work than expected once I finally get inside?

I would calculate all of those costs before making an offer.

If the deal still makes money after incorporating those risks, then I might have something worth pursuing.

If the deal only works if the occupant voluntarily leaves next week, the renovation comes in under budget and the property sells immediately afterward, it’s a hard pass.

The Fastest Solution May Not Be the Courtroom

There is another strategy investors sometimes overlook.

Instead of immediately starting an eviction, find out why the occupant doesn’t want to leave.

That doesn’t mean giving up your legal rights. It means understanding the person you’re dealing with.

In some situations, the occupant isn’t necessarily trying to make the new owner’s life miserable. They may be overwhelmed, financially unable to move or simply have nowhere else to go.

That’s where a cash-for-keys agreement can sometimes make sense.

For example, I might offer $2,500, $5,000 or even more in exchange for the occupant voluntarily vacating the property by a specific date and leaving it in an agreed-upon condition.

This can seem expensive.

But compare $5,000 to six months of attorney fees, court costs, property taxes, insurance, utilities, debt service and lost investment opportunities.

Suddenly, $5,000 might look cheap.

If the only thing preventing someone from leaving is the cost of a security deposit, moving truck and first month’s rent, giving them the money to relocate could potentially solve the problem much faster than waiting for a court date.

But there’s an important caveat.

Cash for keys only works if the occupant actually wants to leave.

If the occupant’s primary objective is to remain in the house and continue fighting the legal battle, offering relocation money will accomplish absolutely nothing.

The Real Lesson for Investors

This story is a good reminder that the cheapest house isn’t necessarily the best deal.

I’ve seen investors get excited about properties because they can buy them significantly below market value. But the purchase price is only one part of the equation.

When I’m evaluating a distressed property, I want to understand the entire situation.

Who owns it?

Who is occupying it?

Why are they there?

Do they have a lease?

Do they claim ownership?

Is there pending litigation?

Can I obtain clear title?

Can I get insurance?

Can I finance it?

How quickly can I obtain possession?

And most importantly, what happens if everything goes wrong?

That’s the difference between buying a problem and buying an opportunity.

A $215,000 house might be a terrible investment if I can’t obtain possession for a year.

A $150,000 house might be a great investment if I have enough margin to cover the legal and carrying costs.

The property itself doesn’t determine whether it’s a good deal.

The price, the risk and the exit strategy do.

And that’s probably the biggest lesson from this Colorado property that has attracted 4.3 million views.

Sometimes you’re not buying a house.

You’re buying everything that comes with it.

And before I sign the contract, I want to know exactly what that is.