That seems like a crazy gamble. 

I use soap when I shower, and occasionally eat cereal for breakfast: that doesn't mean I'm qualified for a job at a CPG company like Kraft, Proctor & Gamble, or Kellogg's.2) Following on 1), by listing it you make it fair game for the employer to poke around.

There will still be some who apply who have a reason for automatic denial - they are willing to gamble that the landlord won't check them out ...But the answer is still yes - that way you are operating in an ethical fashion; those who have a reason for automatic denial should recignize that they are better off going elsewhere, and if they don't they can't say you never told them up front about why they would be declined automatically. 

It's a gamble. 

That's on them.Your tenant sounds like someone with a gambling problem. 

Hello, My future father in law bought a property in 93 which is an 8-plex in LA for around 300,000He owns his own home currently ( beautiful home)and owns a rental also ( I don't know when he purchased this)He also has a real estate license ( he isn't an active realtor, he is retired and just invest in stocks now)He believe california for the place to purchase property because you can see and feel it.I am trying to convince him that just because its out of state, doesn't mean it can't be successful.He says that unemployment is higher than anywhere else in the USACalifornia and Nevada are both around 6.7-7.1% He says thats because obviously the population is much higher in california so its not comparison He believe with the indian reservations in california, it will turn vegas the unpopular place to gamble and all of the las vegas community is fueled by gambling and entertainment. 

You can put whatever you like in your contract, but if it falls under the category of what the law deems to be an Unfair Term it will not be legally enforceable.This is the  UK publication entitled Unfair Terms in Tenancy Agreements.https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284440/oft356.pdfHere's what it says about forcing your tenant to buy renters insurance.unnecessary insurance requirements - we consider that whether tenants wish to insure their own personal belongings is a matter for them and that it is unreasonable for the landlord to make this a contractual requirement.

The issue is that I would gamble they will not pay via money order to your P.O.

Before I just chalked it up to karma, if I really didn't want to pay for a lawyer, I'd at least take the gamble of representing myself and bringing my 3 witnesses. 

To me, one is an act of kindness, the other would be funding what equates to a gambling addiction.I'm glad I'm not in your shoes.