All Forum Posts by: Owen Rosen

Quote from @Owen Rosen:

Quote from @Mary Jay:

Hi guys,

1) So I have an insurance broker and it seems like the properties I have with him keeps getting inspected by the insurance companies.

Our house that we live in is with a different insurance broker, 10 min away from the other ones, and our house NEVER gets inspected by the insurances.

Roofs are the same age. Buildings are the same age.

Is it possible that the insurance brokers advises the insurance companies to do those inspections?

2) Also, any time there is some change he wants pictures of the roof and the building to be sent to him before he changes anything. For example, before he switches a policy from short term rental to long term rental he wants pictures.

Is it normal?

State Florida

3) Also, his policies keeps changing insurance companies probably once a year.

First it was with Citizens insuarnec, now with Menatee insurance, before Citizens it was SLide insurance...

He said Citizens changed my policy to Menatee.

How come Citizens does not change policy on the house we live in? We have had Citizens for the last few years...

Something is fishy... 

 1. Very likely no (how do you think this would benefit him?)

2. The insurance companies might require this.  Is it a problem?

3. Did Citizens send a letter to this effect?  I'm not an expert on Florida insurance but I know Citizens which is state-backed and grew too large is depopulating policies.  They wouldn't just "change" policies without written notification.

You mention a key point at the end.  You can't compare owner occupied to tenant occupied.  Totally different policies and procedures.

Sounds like you don't trust your agent though.  Why do you use him if that's the case?  Have you asked him these questions?  Have you asked your other agent?

As an aside, insurance companies are inspecting most properties one way or another in the current market.  They may have even inspected your primary home without you knowing.

1) I have no idea. All I know is he keeps asking for pictures on the rental, while another insurance agent is not asking any pictures on other rentals that are near.

2) Why do the same insurance companies do not require for other rentals that are in the same shape/age that are with other insurance brokers?

3) I only live in one house, the other ones are rentals. So I am comparing rentals to rentals

Quote from @Owen Rosen:

Quote from @Andrew Steffens:

I have umbrella through Coterie that was previously Hiscox.

STR insurance primarily through Steadily

 What kind of umbrella do you have with Coterie?  They are an insurtech for small business insurance.

 You are correct they handle by PM company liability I have prudential personal liability.

Hi guys,

1) So I have an insurance broker and it seems like the properties I have with him keeps getting inspected by the insurance companies.

Our house that we live in is with a different insurance broker, 10 min away from the other ones, and our house NEVER gets inspected by the insurances.

Roofs are the same age. Buildings are the same age.

Is it possible that the insurance brokers advises the insurance companies to do those inspections?

2) Also, any time there is some change he wants pictures of the roof and the building to be sent to him before he changes anything. For example, before he switches a policy from short term rental to long term rental he wants pictures.

Is it normal?

State Florida

3) Also, his policies keeps changing insurance companies probably once a year.

First it was with Citizens insuarnec, now with Menatee insurance, before Citizens it was SLide insurance...

He said Citizens changed my policy to Menatee.

How come Citizens does not change policy on the house we live in? We have had Citizens for the last few years...

Something is fishy... 

I have umbrella through Coterie that was previously Hiscox.

STR insurance primarily through Steadily

@Owen Rosen 

I'm in WA as is STR

Getting quotes for the house I'm closing on in April and wondering what to how with for coverage limit and umbrella. It will be an STR with no personal use

Background: high income W2 job, no primary home (ADU on family's land property, happy twith this) so can't get umbrella policy with most insurers as they want auto and homeowners for primary home before offering umbrella

Quotes from foremost and proper. Both 1M limit with foremost being more attractive currently. Wondering if how most insurers their STRs? 1M seems low and I'd like umbrella, but appears I'm unable to get it as far as I'm aware. Would love to learn though! 

I know this is a personal liability/risk question, but I'd like to focus more on usual policies and prior cases if this would be sufficient to most? Although I have a high income my assets are not immense and the insurance is protection against future earnings/STR

I will probably buy a primary home in next 5 years but happy for now where I am. 

The agent I spoke with has about 30 years of insurance experience, so I’d hope she knows what she’s talking about and what she’s offering.

I have another policy with Allstate for my 6-unit property, which they were able to insure for approximately $890K because the replacement cost came in under $1M. I agree that 1-4 unit properties are a different ballgame, but within my portfolio, I have a 4-unit property insured for $715K—the same amount as one of my single-family rentals. Interestingly, the premium for the single-family rental is about half that of the 4-unit property.

I’ve owned rental properties for over 34 years, so I have a solid understanding of how premiums and coverages typically align with property values. Additionally, in the past six months, I’ve reviewed about 45 multifamily properties (ranging from 10 to 80 units) for my real estate private equity firm. Based on this experience, I feel I have a fair sense of what pricing should look like.

Do you have any supplemental carriers you’d recommend?

The property value (minus land) is about $1.4M, and rebuild costs are estimated at $1.6M. With Allstate’s RCV policy (not ACV), they estimated the rebuild cost at ~$1.3M. Meanwhile, my current carrier increased their estimated rebuild cost from ~$1.6M to ~$2.6M to justify their premium hike.

Most other quotes I received estimated replacement costs between $1.3M and $1.7M, but finding a carrier willing to underwrite this policy has been challenging. Many have pulled out of insuring multifamily properties or only cover up to 4-unit buildings.

While Allstate doesn’t have a unit cap, they do cap total coverage at $750K on a landlord policy—which is why I’m exploring options for supplemental coverage.

The carrier raised my rate by ~86% on all three properties under this policy. The premiums didn’t make sense compared to the other options I found for the two properties I moved off this policy, nor did they align with the rates I have for other properties in my portfolio that are not on this policy.

I’ve shopped this policy extensively across multiple companies and brokers. The other quotes I received were often unreasonably high compared to other properties in my portfolio—sometimes exceeding my current carrier’s increased rate for this property while offering less coverage. Since Allstate caps property coverage at $750K, I’m specifically looking for supplemental insurance options to bridge the gap. This particular policy originally included three properties, and I successfully found coverage for the other two.

Are there any surplus lines carriers you’d recommend?

Hi BiggerPockets community,

I’m currently evaluating switching to Allstate for coverage on my 7-unit multifamily property built in 1974, as my current carrier increased my premium by about 86% despite no claims. However, Allstate is capping their landlord insurance at $750,000, which creates a coverage gap I need to address.

I’m looking for options to add at least an additional $750,000 in coverage and am wondering if anyone has experience with Difference in Conditions (DIC) coverage or Excess and Surplus policies. Specifically, I’m interested in finding carriers you might recommend could help fill this gap.

Has anyone dealt with a similar situation, or do you have advice on which brokers or carriers are best suited for this kind of coverage?

Appreciate any feedback you can share!

Thanks in advance,
Joel Bechtel

We've gotten off topic a bit but now I'm unclear on who is correct about Additional Insured vs. Additional Interest...

My property manager is on my landlord insurance policy as Additional Insured, and my tenants add me as Additional Interest. My understanding is this is the correct way to do it for these reasons: Renter's insurance is for renters, landlord insurance is for landlords. We each have our own coverage for our own property and our own liability, separately. Typically people only get insurance on things that they own, or liability insurance for their own protection. 

It makes sense for a PM to be Additional Insured on a landlord policy because they can't get insurance coverage on a property they don't own. It makes sense for house mates, spouses etc. to be Additional Insured on a renter's Insurance policy if they also live there and keep their stuff there (although I think anyone on the lease is typically covered anyway). But I don't see why I would be Additional Insured on my tenants renters insurance when it is for their property and their liability, not mine. 

If a situation arises where landlord and tenant end up suing each other or both being named in a lawsuit, and we're on the same insurance policy together, that seems to create more problems than it solves. This structure probably just means more grey area which means more legal fees and perhaps less chance of either of us being covered at all. In some places I think courts prevent people on the same insurance policy from suing each other, and some insurance policies exclude two people on the same policy from suing each other. So this would actually work against the intended purpose. Additionally I think the coverage amount will be limited in some scenarios because by being on the tenant's policy, the landlord is no longer considered a 3rd party. They could get a portion of what the tenant gets in coverage but wouldn't get any additional coverage as a 3rd party. So it's not really "extra coverage" for a landlord, but rather a setup that can potentially create problems and less coverage. What if only the tenant is sued, or only the landlord? Probably better for the other party to not be on the other's policy in that case. What if only the tenant's property is damaged? No need for landlord to be involved in that claim. Renters insurance is so cheap because it is not connected to the property and the landlord after all, right? It's renter's insurance, not landlords. 

It seems like keeping separate insurance policies is the preferred way to go while being added as Additional Interest on the tenants renter's insurance policy in order to be notified of any changes to their policy.

What is the argument for a landlord being added as Additional Insured on a tenant's renter's insurance as opposed to Additional Interest?