@Andreas MirzaThanks again and I know you as well as the other posters have been gently (most) leading me to the same conclusion.

Box (for money orders, cashiers or personal checks)or via online payment system.While it's not kosher to refuse cash payments, it always bothers me why a tenant doesn't have a checking account - - I jump to the conclusion that they're hiding income.It's too late for your problem child but fix the lease for follow-on tenants

I know what you're saying about jumping to conclusions, I think most of us assumed that the tenants were not engaged in illegal activity or otherwise caused the police to show up because of what the OP said:"proceded to look for someone who 1) is not my tenant 2) was not there."

How can you build a case, or come to a conclusion, otherwise?

Everything I've read comes to this conclusion.

sect...It's Section 1962(f):(f) If the address provided by the owner does not allow forpersonal delivery, then it shall be conclusively presumed that uponthe mailing of any rent or notice to the owner by the tenant to thename and address provided, the notice or rent is deemed receivable bythe owner on the date posted, if the tenant can show proof ofmailing to the name and address provided by the owner.

Every time I start looking at one, I come to the conclusion that I'd be better off multiple SFR.

@Anthony Rosa yes, of course the kids would be on the application (if it went that far), but the OP has a track record of posting information about female prospects and seems to have information and conclusions that could only come from asking questions that are discriminatory in nature. 

Nobody is applying science and data to this problem from what we have seen, so we started doing it ourselves.I would love to hear the conclusions from that study!

Why jump to that conclusion so quickly?