Early Access: Video Course on Comparing COIs to Insurance Requirements Extracted from Leases

Introducing Our New Video Course

We’re trying to fill the knowledge gap with our newest video course, designed to make it a bit easier for you to compare the policies and limits listed on your tenant COIs to what insurance is required by your leases. Our work helping property management teams at some of the largest CRE brands in the U.S has allowed us to observe some topics even the most experienced PMs struggle with, including:

  • The difference between personal injury and personal advertising injury
  • What kind of accidents are covered by damage to rented premises limits as opposed to property insurance
  • How to review Workers’ Compensation limits in stop-gap and monopolistic states

Run into issues with any of these in the past? We’ve gotten great feedback from customers on how these videos helped them navigate tricky language in leases. This course has been developed in conjunction with our team of lease extraction experts who have incorporated their learnings into a series of easy-to-understand videos. Interested in seeing what it’s all about? This excerpt of the course features Alex Kario, Senior Director of Auditing Operations here at Jones, talking through the aforementioned difference between personal advertising injury and personal injury. Let’s dive in.

Want to get early access to our course today?

Sign up

What’s Covered Under Personal Advertising Injury and How Does it Appear in Leases?

Key Takeaways

Personal advertising injury:

  • Covers intangible damages like violation of privacy, libel, or copyright infringement
  • Has its own row on a COI in the general liability section

Personal injury:

  • Is how legal professionals refer to a much broader class of claims that encompasses injury or death, physical ailments, physical injuries, as well as the intangible, injuries
  • Does not directly align with the terminology found on the COI 
  • Should be taken to mean bodily injury, which is represented on the “Each Occurrence” row

When reviewing leases for personal advertising injury you should:

  • Look for terminology indicating the limit goes towards intangible damages including slander, kidnapping, false imprisonment, or violation of privacy
  • Not extract any limit that contains verbiage around physical injury, including bodily injury or injury to persons

Sign Up for Early Access Today

The first two chapters of our new course are ready and available for early access today, with the next chapters to roll out over the course of the next few weeks alongside complementary course materials. These initial chapters offer an in-depth two part look into General Liability, and are a must watch for any property manager. Click here to get access today.


About Jones

Jones is the COI management solution that helps property management teams derisk their properties with better certificate of insurance collection, review, and communication of gaps. We work with leading CRE brands like JLL, ESRT, and the Gaedeke Group to help them reduce insurance risk across their portfolios. Get in touch with us via the form below to learn more about how Jones can help your organization better protect itself from insurance risk.

Top COI Tracking Insights: How Jones Reviews Compliance Effectively

 

The Jones team typically does not accept the checkbox alone as evidence of Additional Insured

By default, the Jones team is strict with Additional Insureds and will mark even slight misspellings or errors as noncompliant due to the importance of AI status. Some customers find the checkbox to be sufficient, others require CG 2010 and CG 2037 endorsements (or their equivalents) to evidence Additional Insured status. 

Note: We never mark gaps for missing Additional Insured in the Description of Operations in the states of Georgia, Oregon, and Texas, as the law in these states makes it illegal for an insurance broker to edit the DoO to add Additional Insured parties who are not listed on the underlying policy. 

The Jones team works with our customers to determine when it is and isn’t acceptable for Additional Insured status to be conferred via blanket endorsements.

Blanket Additional Insured endorsements that automatically provide coverage to any party to which the named insured is contractually required to provide coverage are a useful tool to effectively transfer risk while also simplifying the compliance process. Some customers appreciate the simplicity of blanket Additional Insured status as a means to ensure projects aren’t ground to a halt over wrangling a few Additional Insured names on a COI. On the flip side, other organizations prefer the specificity of named Additional Insured to satisfy their own risk appetite. 

Note: interested in exploring how Jones can help you automate your compliance management end-to-end and de-risk your building? Talk to our team of experts today!

Let’s Chat!

Yes, we regularly handle multiple COIs for one subcontractor, tenant, or vendor.

Requiring multiple COIs for one subcontractor is a practice Jones is well acquainted with and is capable of supporting. Many of our GC customers require multiple COIs in order to ensure coverage is conferred to the owner of the project as well as to the GC. The way our software groups insurance documents ensures that our team is able to keep the COIs and endorsements organized for GCs, which is one key part of using Jones as a subcontractor compliance management tool.

Yes, but it’s up to our customers if they choose to accept them or not.

When it comes to the rules your organization chooses to adopt around declaration pages Jones is flexible and capable of adapting to your needs. Some smaller subcontractors and businesses submit declaration pages in lieu of COIs, and Jones auditors are able to review and extract relevant insurance information from them. By standard we extract them as evidencing insurance coverage, but defer to individual customer organizations whether they’re enough for subcontractor compliance, if additional endorsements are needed, or if they shouldn’t be accepted at all in lieu of a COI. 

The Jones team is well versed in arising out of language.

Jones is able to take granular auditing notes from customers and apply them to all insurance document reviews done on their behalf. One of our GC customers is particularly strict about requiring “arising out of” verbiage in opposition to “caused by.” These two terms look similar, but are not exactly the same in regard to the breadth of what they cover. While “caused by” has an element of direct causality, “arising out of” is more broad and means that the accident that caused the claim does not require cause in the legal sense, which expands the scope of coverage.

This understanding of arising out of verbiage comes in handy when we have to check endorsements like GA 472 09 18s for customers. At face value, this endorsement only confers Additional Insured for damage “caused, in whole or in part, by the performance of [their] ongoing operations,” which is too narrow and would not suffice the requirements for the customer mentioned about. However, we know that subsequent verbiage in the GA 472 09 18 states that if required by the underlying contract all “caused by” language could be replaced with “arising out of” language, meaning the endorsement did suffice for our customer’s requirements. 

By default, Jones insurance document reviewers will use umbrella liability to supplement:

Jones insurance document reviewers by default will NOT accept umbrella to cover shortfalls for: 

  • Pollution liability
  • Professional liability 
  • Crime liability

However, this policy can be adjusted in discussion with the Jones insurance auditing team during our auditing standards review call.

By default Jones will not accept self-insurance, except for when it is provided by a government entity.

Unless explicitly stated by a customer the Jones auditing team will not accept self-insurance. Certain customer organizations do choose to accept self-insurance in very fringe situations, and these can be covered and identified in advance in our auditing standards review calls.

Jones does not mark gaps for Waiver of Subrogation for property insurance on any account, even when it appears in the lease. Why? Because no such endorsement exists. The usual practice is to handle rights of recovery by the lease wording itself, not by an endorsement to the policy. The lease, as a binding contract containing a Waiver of Subrogation, fulfills this requirement when signed. 

We flag empty schedule boxes as gaps unless our customers direct us to otherwise.

Jones is capable of flagging gaps for schedule endorsements to match the risk tolerance of our customers. Schedule endorsements provide coverage to specific person(s) or organization(s) and specify the location of covered operations in the schedule box. As a standard practice, where endorsements are required, the Jones team accepts blanket endorsements. However, if a schedule endorsement is provided and the schedule box is left empty, Jones will flag it as incomplete. In such cases Jones will request the inclusion of blanket verbiage in the schedule. Some customers however request that we do not reject endorsements with blank schedules.

 

Get in touch with us via the form below to find out more about how Jones can help your organization more effectively insulate itself from insurance risk with better COI tracking today.

How Jones Auditors Review Endorsements for Compliance

How Jones Reviews Insurance Documents

The process our team of insurance document reviewers follows while checking COIs and endorsements sets us apart from our competitors. Part one of this blog covered the review of COIs and their limits for compliance, but didn’t cover endorsements. During the COI review process our auditors may see endorsements evidenced on the COI in various places, like checkboxes in the policy rows or in the description of operations (DoO) free text section.

coi-example-one

coi-example-two

Some of our customers do not accept the checkboxes or DoO for endorsements depending on their unique risk tolerances. In these cases they require copies of the endorsements. Fortunately, the Jones team are experts at reviewing endorsements for compliance. Their secret weapon? An index that makes quickly checking endorsements’ coverages simple, built out from years of handling insurance documents for customers. 

Note: interested in exploring how Jones can help you automate your compliance management end-to-end and de-risk your building? Talk to our team of experts today!

Let’s Chat!

The Jones Endorsement Index: Making Insurance Document Review Easier

The Jones Auditing Team maintains an up to date endorsement index containing over 1,300 Commercial General Liability (CGL) insurance endorsements and their equivalents, broken down by whether they suffice for requirement types including Additional Insured, Waiver of Subrogation, blanket, ongoing and completed operations, Primary and Noncontributory, and 30 days Notice of Cancellations. Jones also tracks over 200 business owner policy, 300 automobile, and 30 Workers’ Compensation endorsements. This massive library of endorsements and their equivalents mean that no endorsement is too obscure for our team to quickly read and check for compliance. 

jones-endorsement-index

Jones also works with our largest GC clients to build out organization-specific endorsement indices, broken down by insurance carrier, endorsement code, acceptability for the client, and additional auditing comments. Our level of familiarity with the standards of specific accounts means we always audit to the level of accuracy that our customers have come to expect from us, and our tracking system ensures that our no matter which one of our auditors is handling the account that they have relevant information at their disposal. 

Equipped with this index, let’s follow Hisrain Reis, Insurance Policy Analyst at Jones, as he reviews a few tricky endorsements attached to a subcontractor COI for a GC client.

Checking General Liability Endorsements

To set the stage, Hisrain has already reviewed the COI against insurance requirements, finding all the limits, insured name, certificate holder, and addresses compliant. The customer has a few specific requirements when it comes to endorsements that Hisrain is going to have to look out for as he checks them. For commercial general liability the customer requires: 

Additional Insured for CGL

Additional Insured status is a key component of contractual risk transfer, and refers to the extension of coverage to a party not initially covered under the insurance policy. It is common practice for GCs to require that Additional Insured status on their subcontractors’ policies be extended to both them and the project owner. As evidence of the required Additional Insured status for this GC and owner the subcontractor provides Jones with a CG 72 46 11 15 endorsement.

endorsement-example-one

Hisrain knows that this GC customer is very particular about contractual privity. 

endorsement-example-two

Contractual privity verbiage refers to language in endorsements that confers Additional Insured status to organizations that are parties on a written contract as “agreed in writing in a contract or agreement that such person or organization be added as an additional insured on your policy.” While this allows a GC to effectively transfer risk by being included in a subcontractor’s policy, it can leave a project owner at risk as they generally will not sign direct contracts with subcontractors. With that in mind, let’s look at this CG 72 46 11 15. 

endorsement-example-three

What jumps off the page at Hisrain? First section A. 1 makes reference to Additional Insured being conferred via contractual privity which is NOT good enough for the GC. Fortunately, A.2 of that section means Hisrain is able to mark COMPLIANT for Additional Insured for ongoing operations.

endorsement-example-four

But wait- what about completed operations? 

endorsement-example-five

As we can see, the same contractual privity verbiage exists in the endorsement. However, while Section A.2 confers Additional Insured status to the project owner, the lack of a similar extension for completed operations means Hisrain is going to mark this NONCOMPLIANT for missing Additional Insured for completed operations for the owner. The coverage gap of not extending the Additional Insured to the owner for completed ops is not a tolerable gap for the GC.

Waiver of Subrogation for CGL

A WoS endorsement prevents an insurer from seeking recovery from a third party for damages paid in the event of a claim. Most GCs require waiver of subrogation provisions in subcontractor insurance policies to insulate themselves from risk. As evidence of a WoS the subcontractor in today’s example has provided Jones with a CG 70 63 04 17.

endorsement-example-6

Hisrain checks the endorsement index and sees that this suffices the requirement for a WoS. The verbiage in the following section waives the right of the insurance carrier to seek redress or seek compensation for losses from a negligent third party as per the customer’s requirement, so Hisrain marks it COMPLIANT.

endorsement-example-7

Primary and Noncontributory for CGL

Requiring subcontractor insurance policies to be PNC allows GCs to effectively transfer risk downstream by ensuring the subcontractor’s insurers are first to pay (primary) in the event of a claim, as well as pay without seeking contributions from the GC’s insurer (noncontributory). To evidence this the subcontractor has provided a CG 20 01 04 13 endorsement for Hisrain to check.

endorsement-example-eight

This endorsement is relatively straightforward and simple so Hisrain has no problem marking it COMPLIANT.

So, to summarize the endorsements for general liability:

  • Additional Insured endorsement CG 72 46 11 15 is COMPLIANT for ongoing operations and NONCOMPLIANT for completed operations
  • WoS endorsement CG 70 63 04 17 is COMPLIANT
  • PNC endorsement CG 20 01 04 13 is COMPLIANT

Now that he’s finished reviewing all the CGL endorsements for compliance Hisrain is going to move on to the endorsements to umbrella liability.

Checking Umbrella Liability Endorsements

Umbrella liability helps protect GCs from claims by providing additional coverage in the event that the primary coverage, whether it was CGL, automobile, or Workers’ Compensation, exhausts its limits. In this case, umbrella coverage would then cover any additional claims or fees up to its own limits. Like CGL, umbrella liability can also be altered or amended by endorsements. We don’t see many endorsements for umbrella liability, and generally changes to umbrella policies will be indicated either on the COI itself or via a follow form endorsement. In today’s simulated document review the GC customer requires several alterations to the subcontractor’s umbrella liability, including: 

  • Waiver of Subrogation 
  • Primary and Noncontributory 
  • A follow-form endorsement 

Hisrain starts with the WoS endorsement. 

Waiver of Subrogation and Primary and Noncontributory for Umbrella Liability: What do we do now?

Our customer requires a WoS and PNC for subcontractor insurance policies. When Hisrain goes to review the endorsements he finds that only one has been attached to the COI for umbrella liability and that there are no specific endorsements for either WoS or PNC. Does this mean Hisrain is going to mark them noncompliant? First, let’s turn to the one endorsement that was included for umbrella.

Follow Form Endorsements for Umbrella Liability

Hisrain is well acquainted with the one endorsement the subcontractor provided, a EU 00 01 07 16, and knows that it will help him resolve compliance for all the endorsements required for umbrella liability. That’s because the EU 00 01 07 16 is what’s known as a follow-form endorsement, one that amends the scope of coverage to exactly cover the “underlying insurance” that it’s extending.

endorsement-example-nine

Follow-form endorsements are a useful tool to ensure the coverage of the umbrella or excess liability perfectly fits over the other coverages it’s supplementing, either CGL, automobile, or workers’ compensation. The way it refers to the “underlying insurance” indicates that any damage that would be covered by that insurance but extends beyond the limits of coverage would subsequently be covered by the excess liability. This endorsement changes the verbiage of the umbrella policy to exactly follow the verbiage of the policy it is serving to extend the coverage limit of. 

endorsement-example-nine

The existence of the follow-form endorsement indicates to Hisrain that the umbrella liability contains a WoS as well as is PNC due to the fact it follows the form of the CGL policy and its previously reviewed endorsements. With this in mind, Hisrain is going to mark all required endorsements for umbrella liability COMPLIANT.

  • WoS, follow-form, and PNC are COMPLIANT due to endorsement EU 00 01 07 16.

From here, Hisrain progresses to reviewing automobile liability.

Checking Automobile Liability Endorsements

Automobile liability coverage covers the usage of vehicles in commercial operations, as opposed to personal usage of a vehicle. These coverages generally have higher limits than personal automobile liability, and cover a wider variety of vehicles, like hired, owned, and non-owned autos. Hisrain has already ensured the automobile liability coverage evidenced on the COI surpasses all the required limits, as well as meets the category requirements as provided by our GC customer. As was the case with umbrella and CGL, our customer has specific requirements for automobile liability endorsements. In this case they require:

  • Additional Insured status for them and the project owner
  • Primary and Noncontributory
  • Waiver of Subrogation

To provide evidence of these the subcontractor has provided a CA T4 74 02 16 endorsement. 

endorsement-example-eleven

The blanket Additional Insured verbiage featured in this example is by default not accepted by Jones insurance document reviewers, as accepting this broad extension of Additional Insured does not fit the unique risk appetites of certain customers. However, the GC Hisrain is reviewing insurance documents for today is willing to accept this verbiage as they find it an effective method to reduce risk while boosting compliance rates and minimizing impact on day to day business operations.

endorsement-example-twelve

After confirming that this endorsement is COMPLIANT for Additional Insured Hisrain moves onto PNC. He quickly finds verbiage indicating that the policy is in fact PNC, and marks that COMPLIANT as well.

endorsement-example-thirteen

However, upon finishing review of the endorsement Hisrain notices that it lacks a WoS, or any verbiage suggesting the insurer will relinquish the right to seek recovery from a third party for damages paid in the event of a claim. A quick review of our endorsement index confirms that it lacks a WoS, so Hisrain marks that gap.

    • Additional Insured and PNC are COMPLIANT from endorsement CA T4 74 02 16
    • WoS is NONCOMPLIANT on endorsement CA T4 74 02 16

From here Hisrain will move onto the last policy he needs to check endorsements for, Workers’ Compensation.

Checking Workers’ Compensation Endorsements

Workers’ Compensation covers employees’ lost wages and medical expenses due to injury on the job, ensuring that injured or sick workers are able to receive the wages they need without negatively impacting business operations. This coverage is no fault, and statutory limits for minimum coverages are generally defined on a state to state basis. Hisrain has already confirmed that the limits meet the statutory limits, so he’s going to move onto the endorsements required. For Workers’ Compensation, our customer is strict when it comes to their WoS and will not accept the checkbox as evidence.

jones-auditor-screenshot

Hisrain turns to the provided WC 42 03 04 B to check it for compliance.

Waiver of Subrogation

The WC 42 03 04 B endorsement provided by the subcontractor is a Texas specific endorsement as Workers’ Compensation is regulated on a state by state basis as discussed prior.

endorsement-example-fourteen

As Hisrain can see from this endorsement, the subcontractor has extended Workers’ Compensation as required via a blanket waiver. This does suffice for the WoS requirements as the customer defined with Jones, so Hisrain goes ahead and marks it COMPLIANT.

  • Workers’ Compensation endorsement WC 42 03 04 B is COMPLIANT for waiver of subrogation.

Communication of Gaps

Now that Hisrain has finished reviewing the endorsements attached to the subcontractor’s COI, he’ll go ahead and generate a report that highlights the gaps to the admin in charge of COIs at the GC. From there, they’ll have the option to waive, accept, or send gaps to the subcontractor. Jones’ easy to understand dashboard makes understanding and managing gaps far easier than manually tracking them in spreadsheets and emailing out gaps.

jones-screenshot-1

jones-screenshot-two

Why You Should Trust Jones with Your COIs and Endorsements

Our knowledge of GC specific workflows and ability to accurately review complicated endorsements makes Jones the best choice for risk-focused construction organizations. Trusting “the other guys” with the review of your insurance documents leaves your company exposed to risk due to the lack of granular COI and endorsement review standards. You need a COI and subcontractor compliance management tool that is willing to understand your unique risk tolerance and review documents to your required standards, not implement a one size fits all approach that fails to protect your company from claims. GCs like SavCon, Harvey-Cleary, Bulley and Andrews, Manhattan Construction and more have chosen Jones because of how we effectively bring together software and insurance expertise to help derisk their projects and support their insurance compliance strategies. Plus, faster compliance can improve construction accounts payable. Get in touch with us below to find out more about bringing Jones on to support your insurance risk strategy today.