SFR rental policy 40% higher?

2 Replies

I'm in the process of converting a vacation home I own into a rental property as well as trying to pick up another SFR home as a rental in the near future. Right now, the vacation home is insured through a brand name national carrier for around $600/year with $1M liability and $1,000 deductible. When talking to the insurance agent this week, I was quoted $1,000/year to go to a commercial policy with similar coverage limits. Does that seem appropriate? Both policies are for replacement value on a 1,800SF home in WI.

I didn't expect to see such a big jump in premiums. I understand that having a tenant in the building is a higher risk than owner occupied, but somehow I thought that would be offset in that there is no personal property to cover anymore.

My next step is to find a good independent broker to look at my entire insurance portfolio. Is there anything else I should be considering at the moment? This is my first venture into the world of holding rental property. Thanks for the help!

Yep, landlord insurance is quite a bit more expensive than homeowners.

There is more to look at but your cost doesn't sound too far off.   Get a copy of the policy and see what the ISO form is.  ISO is the standards body and the forms usually have a prefix of HO or FN.  

You need to know this because there are a few ways to insure your house and cover your liability.  Landlord Endorsement on an HO policy or FN policy are more appropriate at this point for you.  AND, your $1M liability should be reduced to $300k plus you need a $1M Liability Policy or Umbrella.  

I'd be surprised if you need a 'commercial policy'.  Did you buy the homes in your business name?  If so, you do need a commercial policy.  The name brand writers aren't necessarily the best commercial insurers.  Network with others to see who they use in your area.


Create Lasting Wealth Through Real Estate

Join the millions of people achieving financial freedom through the power of real estate investing

Start here