Browse the full Resources Index
Commercial buildings with multiple tenants often include improvements that were installed after the building’s original shell was completed, things like custom millwork, specialized electrical service, interior partition walls, or upgraded flooring installed for a particular tenant’s use. These tenant improvements, commonly shortened to TI, raise a recurring question in commercial claims: who actually owns the improvement, and whose insurance policy is expected to respond when it is damaged.
The answer generally traces back to the lease agreement between the landlord and the tenant rather than to any general rule. Some leases specify that improvements made by a tenant become part of the real property and belong to the landlord upon installation or at lease termination, which typically means they fall under the building owner’s property policy. Other leases allow the tenant to retain ownership of improvements they paid for and installed, in which case those items may be covered, if at all, under the tenant’s own policy as a scheduled improvement or as part of their business personal property coverage. Many commercial policies also include a specific tenant improvements and betterments provision addressing exactly this scenario.
Because the lease terms drive so much of this analysis, an appraisal involving a multi-tenant building often benefits from knowing, in advance, which improvements are actually in scope for a given policy before time is spent measuring and pricing them. An appraiser working from a building owner’s policy needs to understand which fixtures and finishes are treated as part of the building versus which belong to a tenant’s separate coverage, and documentation such as the lease’s improvements clause or a prior schedule of tenant work can clarify boundaries that might otherwise be ambiguous from a site inspection alone.
This distinction becomes especially relevant after a loss that affects finished tenant spaces, such as a wind event that damages a roof and allows water to reach ceiling tiles, flooring, and built-in cabinetry below. Sorting out which damaged item is a building component and which is a tenant improvement is a documentation and measurement exercise, and it is worth remembering that determining which policy responds to a particular item, or whether it is covered at all, is a question for the policy language and the parties involved, not something an appraiser is positioned to resolve.
Lease documents often attach a specific exhibit describing the improvements a tenant was permitted or required to install, sometimes tied to a tenant improvement allowance the landlord provided as part of the leasing arrangement, and that exhibit can be a useful reference point when trying to determine what was originally installed and by whom. Real property classification questions, meaning whether a given item counts as a fixture belonging to the building or as removable tenant property, often turn on factors such as how the item is physically attached, how adaptable it is to another use, and what the parties intended at the time of installation. These are the same general factors courts and appraisers alike look to when a fixture question needs to be sorted out, even though the underlying inquiry is grounded in property law rather than construction practice.
This article is general education about how the appraisal process commonly works. It is not legal advice, and specific procedures can vary by state and policy.
Russ Lis is a working property insurance appraiser and umpire based in Minnesota, serving clients nationwide. Contact Appraisal Resolution.