If that situation applies to you, that's potentially a $50k unnecessary expense by delaying a sale any longer.http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/the-250000500000-home-sale-tax-exclusion.html

The others cost me unnecessary time and thousands of dollars.

Tenant shall not do or keep anything in or about the premises that will obstruct the public spaces available to other residents.This includes but is not limited to, using the porch for parties, storage of goods, objects, or furniture, lounging or unnecessary loitering on the front steps, hallway, or porch."

The most irritating thing about them is that they waste your time with an unnecessary appointment, but I was never notified of a complaint.Also, at least in CA, the fair housing dept will first vet the complaint before they will go forward.  

Either way you'll be sparing both of you much unnecessary drama.

If either party is not happy you do not want a long lease.I would add the air if the market allowed me to raise the rent enough to be recouped the cost within 2 years max. otherwise it is a unnecessary expense.

They get unnecessary delinquencies because of the way the bills are generated.  

That got tedious and really convoluted particularly if you have a grace period and you have to ration do you retro calculate back over the grace period as days late or not...it led to unnecessary tenant arguments.I now charge a flat $50, no grace period, and I have a similar fee ($35) for any NSF payments (I specifically note in the agreement that a NSF payment will undoubtedly create a late fee so it is clear it's VERY COSTLY to write me a bad check).I make one caveat with my tenants; if they mail the rent to me, as long as it is postmarked before the 1st day of the month, even if it arrives late, I will not charge them a late fee.I have collected one late fee on five properties since I have implemented that policy, and I'm much happier to have my calculated rent on time for my bills than to make an "extra" $15-50 every so often because my tenants can't get it together.

They could win it back in small claims court, and can show the bogus deductions, but that's unnecessary because of the failure to do the walk-through.The walk-through is designed by law, to give tenants the ability to get their full deposit back, by giving them a complete list of what they need to do in order to get it back.  

That just seems like a scare tactic to get a lot of insurance sold, that is unnecessary.