Had you met with the plumber you might have learned first hand from him about how toilet system works and that questioning if the tenant was responsible is really an absurd accusation.

If it's starting to show signs of possible water damage, apply a false side.

It sounds absurd but there are tenants out there who will do it, and depending on what county you are in judges who will allow it.As far as pets, I allow pets with a one time non-refundable $1,200 fee due up front.

Also, false or misleading information on a rental application is also a solid reason for denial.

FALSE!

I'm assuming (maybe falsely) the odds are good that many who actually apply will meet the lease requirements (aka tenant checks) so then it's a matter of which one.  

can make a bunch of false statements intended to persuade you into accepting them.

In addition you stay on top of a brand new tenant in those most important first 3 months of the lease, keep them in line, watch out for any warning signs, squash any issues like a bug and be ready to evict at one false move made by them.I don't  put a lot of faith in 'collectable' versus 'uncollectable' tentants as almost everyone is uncollectable to one degree or another.

In which case you would have not only claim to property damages but also several avenues of personal damage (i.e illegal seach, false charges, false arrest, possibly harassment and/or defamation of character.)It's no more the tenants fault then if the property was vandalized or broken into, they have no control over the police, and they had done nothing to bring the police to the property.

Which is, legally, simply false.