Exhibit 99.2

8201 Cypress Plaza Drive, Suite 100

Jacksonville, FL 32256

Office:  904-497-0030

April 8, 2026

Progress Residential Master Trust

810 7th Avenue, 24th Floor

New York, New York 10019

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In connection with the offering (the “Offering”) of the securities of the Issuing Entity referenced above, we have conducted the HOA Discrepancy Review further described below. The review was conducted in accordance with what we believe to be customary residential title practice and was intended to assist in resolving certain discrepancies regarding whether specified properties may be subject to an active homeowners’, condominium, or other common-interest community association (each an “HOA”) as of the date hereof. A more detailed description of services performed and of our findings and conclusions is set forth below. The description below is intended to satisfy the disclosure requirements of Items 4 and 5 of FORM ABS DUE DILIGENCE-15E, which form has been provided to you concurrently herewith.

I. Manner and Scope of Review Performed (Item 4 of Form ABS Due Diligence-15E)

a. Background.

We have been informed that:

b. Properties Subject to Review. [(1) through (3) of Item 4.]

The Loan Sponsor and/or Loan Sponsor’s agent provided us with a list of properties with respect to which we were requested to perform our HOA Discrepancy Review (each, a “Subject Property”; collectively, the “Subject Properties”). The list of Subject Properties is attached hereto as Schedule I. Our HOA Discrepancy Review did not include “sampling” the pool.  The Subject Properties were not chosen using randomization, probability sampling, or any other statistical methodology.  Rather, the Subject Properties were identified by you.  Accordingly, they may not be representative of the entire pool, as to which we make no representation.

c. How the Review Was Conducted. [(4) of Item 4.]

We applied what we believe to be customary residential title practice to locate evidence that a Subject Property may be subject to an active HOA. We and/or our third-party vendor(s) employ a variety of customary searching methods, the most salient of which are described below, that are reasonably designed to reveal evidence regarding the existence of an active HOA (the “HOA Discrepancy Review”). Every property is unique, and not every search method is employed with respect to each of the Subject Properties. These methods are intended to allow us to reach a reasonable judgment regarding the likely existence of an active HOA. However, for a variety of reasons, including the reasons described below under “Limitations of Searching Methods,” it is not possible to determine with absolute certainty that no active HOA exists with respect to the Subject Properties.

Customary Searching Methods. Set forth below are certain customary inquiries which we and our third-party vendor(s) employ to locate evidence that an active HOA may exist. As noted, not all of the below referenced inquiries are used for every Subject Property.

Limitations of Searching Methods.

As noted, it is not possible for any inquiry to prove with absolute certainty that no HOA exists with respect to the Subject Properties, and customary searching methods are subject to certain inherent limitations. Those limitations include, but are not limited to, the following:

It is possible for an HOA to exist even though the DCCR reviewed does not contain an explicit reference to an HOA, or there appears to be no DCCR. This may happen for several reasons. For example, there may have been a drafting error in the DCCR, or an important amendment to the DCCR or the DCCR itself could have been misfiled or incorrectly referenced. Old or vague descriptions can also prevent this review from being definitive. It is also possible for a DCCR to contemplate an HOA, yet nonetheless one may not be active.

It is possible for an HOA to exist and yet not be registered with relevant state agencies. In some instances, an HOA may not be legally required to be registered. Furthermore, even when such a requirement applies, there may nonetheless be an HOA that is simply not in compliance with applicable registration requirements.

Many HOAs do not establish web sites or other presence on the internet. Further, internet searches are, by their nature, imprecise. Thus, the lack of applicable search “hits” from general internet searching cannot prove that an HOA is not applicable to a Subject Property.

It is possible that a Subject Property has never been subject to a prior mortgage. Even where a prior mortgage does exist, it is possible for the lender to have failed to include a PUD rider in the mortgage, even if the property had been subject to an HOA.

Even when listing agents are contacted, there is no way of ensuring that any agent is in fact especially knowledgeable regarding any Subject Property or the neighborhood where the property is located.

Although neighborhood residents or homeowners are sometimes contacted for information, locating contact information for such persons is a random selection process. Persons contacted may not be able or willing to answer our questions, or they may even provide inaccurate information.

d. Additional Information Regarding Scope of Review. [(5) through (8) of Item 4.]

We have not undertaken any data integrity or other review beyond what is described herein, nor was our review undertaken for the purpose of:

1. Satisfying any criteria for due diligence published by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization, or 2. Making any findings with respect to:

Our HOA Discrepancy Review is limited to the procedures set forth in (c) above. Although we believe these procedures to be customary residential title practice to locate evidence that a property may be subject to an active HOA, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described in (c) above, either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.

II. Summary of Findings and Conclusions from Our Review (Item 5 of Form ABS Due Diligence-15E)

Based upon the HOA Diligence Review conducted in accordance with the procedures outlined in Part I above, and assuming the accuracy of the information contained in the documents described therein, we concluded, as set forth in more detail in Schedule I attached hereto and subject to the limitations set forth herein, that:

To our knowledge, after inquiry as described above, 1772 of 2349 of the Subject Properties set forth on Schedule I are subject to an active and mandatory HOA.

Our conclusions are limited to the matters expressly stated herein, and no opinion is implied or may be inferred beyond the matters expressly stated herein.  The conclusions expressed herein are given only as of the dates when the research was conducted, and we undertake no responsibility to update or supplement this report after the dates thereof for any reason.

This report was prepared solely for the benefit of the addressee set forth above. It should not be relied on in any manner or for any purpose by any other person or entity, including prospective investors or ratings agencies in connection with the offering referenced above (collectively, “Third Parties”), except for placement agents involved directly with the placement of this securitization transaction. Accordingly, this report was not intended to create, and shall not be deemed to create any benefits, rights, duties, or obligations in or to, any such Third Parties.

Except as required by law, this report may not be quoted in whole or in part, including in any prospectus or offering memorandum, without our prior written consent.  In addition, this report is not assignable to any person or entity without our prior written approval.

Selene Title, LLC

By: /s/ Jennifer Slifkin   
Name: Jennifer Slifkin
Title: Manager

SCHEDULE I