Sooner or later, every landlord discovers that his lease can be a huge impediment to the eviction of a problem tenant.
The difficulty stems from the fact every type of misbehavior for which the landlord may wish to end the tenancy must be expressly forbidden by the lease. This problem alone has led to leases running to 30 and more legal size pages.
Secondarily, even though the subject misbehavior is specifically mentioned and forbidden by the lease, it must be proved in court that the misbehavior actually took place.
Certain very common problems are notoriously difficult to prove: Extra occupants, excessive noise, sale or use of drugs, prostitution, causing vermin infestations, misuse or excessive use of furnished utilities or heat, unruly or destructive guests, harassment or intimidation of other tenants and the frustration of maintenance work and scheduling are frequently encountered.
Because of the difficulty that any lease brings to the eviction process, its existence has negative value to the landlord in that it weakens his authority and control of his properties. Its positive values are the stabilizing effect of locking each tenancy in for a year or more and the "up-front" statement of the rules of the game for the tenant to endorse with his signature.
The second of these advantages can be secured by the use of a month-to-month rental agreement, the first depends heavily on the financial substance of the tenant. The term provisions of no lease can be effectively enforced against an uncollectible tenant.
Other problems also exist, such as mitigation of damages and skip tracing. In summary, the lease-less landlord is a more powerful landlord, the lessor landlord is a financially more-secure landlord under certain circumstances.