|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Security for Tenants and Their Lenders: ALTA Introduces Expanded Leasehold Coverages
After weeks of protracted negotiations, you call your client and tell her that the lease for her business's new space is ready to sign. You have both spent many hours (and dollars) hammering out issues crucial to her business such as use provisions, remedies, maintenance obligations and renewal terms. You are confident that every danger has been diminished and every pitfall protected against.
Notwithstanding diligent efforts, leasehold transactions present unique problems for practitioners and chief among them is the inadequacy of protection for tenants in the event of title problems that detrimentally affect the leasehold estate. For many years real estate practitioners and their clients have chosen to forego the protections afforded by the leasehold policy. Many felt protected by the lessor's due diligence (including title searches and title insurance) and the terms of the lease. This sense of security, no doubt was a relative one based on the limited protections offered by the title insurance industry and its 1975 ALTA Leasehold Policies. Now may be the time to rethink whether or not title insurance should be obtained to protect owners of leasehold interests. For one thing, the protections afforded by your lease may be wholly inadequate due to the financial situation of the Landlord. For another, there are new products offered by the title industry With the introduction of the ALTA 13 Leasehold Owner's Endorsement and the corresponding ALTA 13.1 Leasehold Loan Endorsement, the title industry has responded to the demands of its customers by offering significantly expanded leasehold coverages. Now, the product being offered more accurately addresses developments in the leasing market. Retail, office and industrial tenants investing thousands of dollars in leasehold improvements were not adequately protected. The 1975 Policy also failed to protect the holder of a leasehold that was valuable due to its particular location. This article will undertake to set forth, with simplicity, the differences between the new endorsements and the 1975 Leasehold policy, and to point out the practical benefit of these new products. The following comparison sets forth the text of the ALTA 13 Leasehold Owner's Endorsement with commentary inserted discussing the differences with the 1975 Leasehold Owner's policy. The uninterrupted text of the ALTA 13 and ALTA 13.1 Endorsements follow these materials as Exhibit A, and Exhibit B, respectively. I. A Comparison of Protection
1975 Comparison: Evicted: The Endorsement contains a definition of the terms "evicted" and "eviction" that was lacking from the predecessor policy. This definition is important in that it provides the insured with protection against the inability to utilize the premises for a particular use specified in the lease. Leasehold Estate: The 2001 Endorsement deleted from the definition of "Leasehold Estate" language that subjected the coverage to lease provisions limiting the Tenant's right to possession. This eliminates an area for conflict in the 1975 Policy. The ALTA committee also decided not to create a specific exception for the Tenant's duties under the lease. Tenant Leasehold Improvements: One of the most frequent complaints about the 1975 Leasehold Policy was that it excluded from coverage the tenant's leasehold improvements. Due to changes in the nature of today's leasing market, these improvements may represent a significant part of the value of the lease. The new endorsement specifically includes these improvements, provided the tenant has more than a mere possessory interest in the improvements.
1975 Comparison: The new owner's endorsement states that Section 7 (b) ("coinsurance") of the conditions and stipulations do not apply to the valuation of the Leasehold Estate. The thought was that this is a difficult valuation to begin with and would likely present fertile ground for argument. The provision means that the Tenant will not have to procure an appraisal at the front end of the Lease. The exclusion does not apply to the value of Leasehold Improvements, since valuing these is imminently less complicated. The Tenant (or its counsel) is advised to obtain insurance in an amount based on a tenant improvement construction budget. The prudent practitioner will advise his client to be certain to obtain sufficient coverage based on a reasonable estimate of the value of the leasehold.
1975 Comparison: Perhaps the most valuable expansion of coverage in the new endorsement is found in the reformulation of the method for determining loss. After all this is where the money is, so to speak. Whereas, under the 1975 Leasehold Policy, the Leasehold Estate value was determined by subtracting the rent to be paid under the lease for the remainder of the term (including any options or renewals) from the fair market rental value for the same term (as determined by appraisal). This difference, if any, would be the limit for the insured's recovery. Thus, if there were a dip in the local rental market, the insured may be barred from any recovery. Additionally, there was no provision for any recovery for amounts spent on tenant upfit and improvements. Clearly, such a result would not be acceptable in today's market where Tenants routinely spend thousands to "customize" space based on the unique needs of their business. Since the endorsements valuation system will generally be based on an appraisal, there is also the flexibility to add value based on the worth of a particular location to the Tenant's business. Such a valuation was not contemplated under the 1975 policy definitions. This added protection should prove extremely valuable in the retail leasing market, where everyone knows the old addage about "location".
1975 Comparison: Again, the 2001 endorsement greatly expands the scope of coverage for leasehold owners and lenders. While the 1975 policy offered some coverage for additional items of damages (e.g. moving costs for personal property; sublease damages; damages payable to the owner of paramount title), the new endorsement contains significant new coverages. Reimbursement for transportation costs for relocating the insured's personal property is now covered for a 100 mile radius (an increase from the 25 miles allowed under the 1975 policy). Additionally, the new endorsement now covers certain hard and soft costs incurred in the construction of the Leasehold Tenant Improvements. These costs include costs to obtain permits and zoning, architectural and engineering fees, and costs and interest associated with financing. Obviously, the ability to recapture these costs is of great interest to the insured. II. Conclusion Reacting to longstanding complaints from various interested parties, the ALTA has crafted new coverage for leasehold interest owners and lenders. This protection more accurately reflects current realities in the leasing market and offers Tenants and their lenders a new security for their transactions involving leaseholds. These parties can now rest assured that there is comprehensive coverage available to address title issues affecting the leasehold. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||