TOTALLY unnecessary!

It is possible and legal to honestly say that the owner is absent and you are renting the property until he or she returns.Though Adverse Possession law is not clear to the average person, nor to the average investor, the very website that you linked in a comment above, does provide an answer to your own challenges (except for your unnecessary claim that renting an abandoned property means pretending to own it).Sue you have linked to - http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/adve...Under the “Elements” paragraph of that link it is clear our laws recognize that “nonpermissive use by the adverse claimant that is actual, open and notorious, exclusive, hostile, and continuous for the statutory period” can “ripen into legal title”.  

Since the clause of the first option calls it "Liquidation Damage and Termination Fee", my attorney also told me I am within my rights to take all that money and there is no double dipping because it is not a "Lost rent" but a "penalty".So yes bottom line I have the right to take impose a penalty which is two months worth and they signed on the dotted line.Typically, I have been very understanding and if I do find a replacement tenant I will refund the difference IF the circumstances around the move is one I can relay to...like a job transfer, a parent is sick, getting married, etc etc etc and the tenant has been good about it. 

Can I impose quiet hours?

Civil Code §1748.1 (a) No retailer in any sales, service, or lease transaction with a consumer may impose a surcharge on a cardholder who elects to use a credit card in lieu of payment by cash, check, or similar means.

In my opinion, you are causing yourself to be exposed to a lot of completely unnecessary  risk.  

Bank accounts and on-line processes are our paradigms, we can't impose them on those who don't use them.Some of our tenants bring the rent to us.  

If the city imposes a moving fee, the city should pay it out of taxes everyone in SF pays. 

I don't see anyone trying to impose political views here.  

You cast aspersions on an entire profession by claiming that PM's rip people off by charging unnecessary maintenance fee's using the "dreaded emergency clause" as you put it.