What Endorsement Adds a Landlord as an Additional Insured?

• By: The Big "I" Virtual University
• November 13, 2026

Q: To add a landlord as an additional insured, which endorsement is better: CG 20 10, Additional Insured—Owners, Lessees or Contractors—Scheduled Person or Organization; or CG 20 11, Additional Insured—Managers or Lessors of Premises? Does CG 20 10 provide additional insured status to the listed landlord when there are no operations performed on behalf of the landlord? The only relationship to the tenant is lessor and lessee.

Response 1: In my opinion, no, CG 20 10 would not be useful in that situation. The CG 20 10 generally extends additional insured status only with respect to liability caused, in whole or in part, by the named insured’s acts or omissions in the performance of the named insured’s ongoing operations for the additional insured. It states:

Section II – Who Is An Insured is amended to include as an additional insured the person(s) or organization(s) shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability for “bodily injury”, “property damage” or “personal and advertising injury” caused, in whole or in part, by:

1. Your acts or omissions; or

2. The acts or omissions of those acting on your behalf;

in the performance of your ongoing operations for the additional insured(s) at the location(s) designated above.

A tenant is not performing operations “for” the landlord; they’re performing operations for themselves. The landlord is just giving them a place to do it. CG 20 10 is for construction projects and is not suitable for real estate lease exposures.

Compare that to the CG 20 11, where the landlord is an additional insured for the “ownership, maintenance, or use” of the leased premises. 

Response 2: If the landlord is named in the schedule, it is added as an additional insured for acts of the named insured, or someone acting on their behalf, in the performance of the named insured’s ongoing operations. 

Suppose we’re talking about a retail store. A customer is struck by a broom used by the insured’s employee and names the landlord in the bodily injury lawsuit. It’s covered because it’s caused by the insured’s acts. If the injury is caused by tripping on a defective floorboard, assuming the insured wasn’t involved in the defect, there’s no coverage. 

Clearly there will be cases where liability could arise in situations where it’s not clear that it resulted from the insured’s ongoing operations. In those cases, this endorsement would not be the answer.

Response 3: Standard additional insured endorsements address specific business relationships where one party is providing insured status to another under the first party’s commercial general liability policy—for example, a project owner and a general contractor or a landlord and a tenant. 

The endorsements you mention meet two different exposure scenarios. If the landlord wants to be named as an additional insured for ongoing operations where the ongoing operations are not being performed for the landlord, the correct endorsement is CG 20 26, Designated Person or Organization.

By the way, if there is no lease in place between the tenant and landlord, but the tenant has agreed to name the landlord as an additional insured, the CG 20 26 should be used to meet that exposure as well. 

This question was originally submitted by an agent through the Big “I” Virtual University’s (VU) Ask an Expert service, with responses curated from multiple VU faculty members. Answers to other coverage questions are available on the VU website. If you need help accessing the website, request login information.

This article is intended for general informational purposes only, and any opinions expressed are solely those of the author(s). The article is provided “as is” with no warranties or representations of any kind, and any liability is disclaimed that is in any way connected to reliance on or use of the information contained therein. The article is not intended to constitute and should not be considered legal or other professional advice, nor shall it serve as a substitute for obtaining such advice. If specific expert advice is required or desired, the services of an appropriate, competent professional, such as an attorney or accountant, should be sought.