Industrial growth brings employers who lease houses for their workforce. A corporate tenant is a different counterparty from a family, and the lease and the policy both need to know.
A company signs the lease and employees occupy the house. Those are two different relationships.
Three things about renting to an employer rather than a resident.
A company holds the lease and its employees live in the house, sometimes rotating through it. That is a different occupancy pattern from a family tenancy: more turnover, less continuity, and nobody with a personal stake in the property. Carriers ask about occupancy, and the honest answer here is not "a tenant".
With a family you can require tenant insurance in the lease. With rotating employees it is less obvious who would hold it. Addressing that in the corporate lease, rather than leaving it, keeps a real exposure off your policy.
A corporate tenant usually pays dependably, which is the attraction. The trade is higher turnover and heavier wear from occupants who are not making a home. Both sides of that belong in how the property is insured and maintained.
The tenancy as it actually operates.
Carriers want the occupancy, not the counterparty.
Worth requiring of the company in the lease.
Turnover drives both wear and vacancy questions.
Tell us who signs the lease, who lives there and how often they change.
We describe the occupancy honestly, which is what carriers actually rate.
Request a quote