Read your lease, mine says tenants have the right to have quiet enjoyment of their place, so if a tenant disrupts that quiet enjoyment that is basis for eviction.

The easiest way to disrupt or prevent an easement by perscription is by giving consent.

Hey everyone I'm a big fan of the forums and podcast and this question may be a little out of the ordinary but here it is.

I live in the SF Bay Area and have some very loud, dirty and overall disrespectful neighbors ...

My life would be upended with people coming into my space, my bathroom would be torn up for however long - when I would have rather left things the way they were and not have my home invaded and disrupted by construction and workers, etc.And I think landlords also forget that tenants aren't really in a position to tell you that they actually hate what you're doing.  

Of course we all have terms in the lease that prohibit general disruptive behavior. 

Regarding #1, a neighbor would need to show your tenants disrupted their quiet enjoyment of their own property and that material damages resulted.  

I do hate evictions because they disrupt everyone involved, but in some cases, the problems will continue to intensify.

Both may qualify but the obvious choice would be the one lease disrupted by the move and the one you can more completely screen with the lease amount of effort and risk.

Second, I would not want to disrupt my tenants monthly budgeting habits, by taking advance payment now and evict next year, because they got out oft the habit of budgeting for rent each moth.

Updating attracts the best qualified and usually least disruptive tenants.