REAL ESTATE

Belk to unveil new design at Waynesville Commons

BY Katherine Boccaccio

Waynesville, N.C. — Shopping center developer CBL & Associates Properties, based in Chattanooga, Tenn., said Friday that it has launched construction on its newest community center project Waynesville Commons, located in Waynesville, N.C.

The 127,500-sq.-ft. shopping center will be anchored by a new 85,000-sq.-ft. Belk fashion department store, which joins the existing Walmart.

Also anchoring the project will be Michaels, and PetSmart, along with 11,000 sq. ft. of specialty stores. Initial site-work is underway with a grand opening scheduled for October 2012.

Belk will relocate from its current 50,000-sq.-ft. store at Ingles Market and will incorporate a new retail design, lighting, merchandise presentation and décor, and will offer expanded merchandise assortments.

“This represents an $8.2 million investment for Belk that will create an exciting new shopping environment designed especially for our customers in Waynesville,” said Bill Roberts, chair of the Belk Northern Division based in Raleigh, N.C.

The current Belk store will continue to operate at Ingles Market until the new store opens next October.

keyboard_arrow_downCOMMENTS

Leave a Reply

No comments found

Polls

Consumer confidence is high. Is that reflected in your stores’ revenues?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
REAL ESTATE

Insurance Issues Too Important to Ignore

BY CSA STAFF

By Robert Machson, [email protected]

Given the increasing cost of insurance and insured “loss,” this article discusses some of the quickest ways landlords and tenants can save money and avoid disputes.

The typical lease requires the landlord and tenant to purchase “insurance” for property damage and liability claims in and to the shopping center and the common areas. A first stumbling block is what is meant by the term “insurance.” From the layperson’s point of view, insurance means coverage purchased from a rated, commercial insurance company. But what if a party wants to provide coverage through less traditional means, such as self-insurance or a “captive” carrier?

Self insurance is the easier of the two. To begin, “self-insurance” is an oxymoron: one cannot really “self-insure,” because insurance requires a “transfer of risk” from one party to another. Thus, to the degree a lease requires a party to purchase or provide insurance, it should never be allowed to self-insure.

Of course, many leases contain provisions permitting a party to self-insure, generally if they can demonstrate some minimum net worth. While this may present no conflict for the tenant, a landlord’s agreement to self-insure may run afoul of other provisions in the lease, for example, the so-called “exculpatory” provision, in which the landlord’s liability to the tenant is limited to its actual equity in the shopping center. A smart tenant may want to carve out liability claims (at a minimum) from any exculpatory provision, especially if the landlord is seeking to self-insure.

Another trend is the use of “captive” insurance, which in some ways is like self-insurance. A few states — notably Vermont and a number of non US jurisdictions, for example, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands — permit companies to insure their parent and affiliates for loss that the company is likely to encounter, for example, workers’ compensation. Because it is a strictly intra-company transaction, the use of a captive permits them to take advantage of a number of accounting, tax and regulatory benefits, which might not otherwise be available.

There may be a number of concerns to using a captive to satisfy insurance obligations, only a few of which can be addressed here. One is whether “captive insurance” is “insurance” at all within the meaning of a traditional shopping center lease. At least one federal district court has held that it is not, ruling that the word “insurance” means a policy purchased from a third-party, commercial carrier.

Another issue that arises with the use of a captive is how the landlord would calculate the premium to be charged to the tenant. The reason for this is that the cost (“premium”) of the captive coverage between affiliates is not governed either by regulators or the commercial market. Not surprisingly, the tenant might wonder whether it is being charged the same or less than it would pay to a commercial carrier.

How would a tenant know if a landlord is using a captive and whether the premium is a fair? First, most leases require the landlord (and tenant) to provide a certificate of insurance. The name of the carrier will be on the certificate. Look it up on the Internet; you should know quickly enough whether it’s a captive. (One tip: if the landlord is a public company, the captive will be listed as a subsidiary in its public filings.)

Determining whether the captive premium is a fair, market rate is far more difficult (which is one reason tenants may want to preclude landlords from billing for captive coverage). For that, the landlord will have to disclose how it came up with the premium, meaning it would have to show how it allocated the risk and matched that to competitive market rates.

Another thorny issue is deductibles, both how high they should be, and who should pay them. It is important to note that a deductible, like “self-insurance,” is not insurance at all. Therefore, a lease that requires the tenant to reimburse the landlord only for the “cost of insurance” may not require the tenant to pay any share of the deductible. Nevertheless, the deductible is too important to leave to chance.

There are two issues. The first is the amount of the deductible; the second, who pays. A commercially reasonable deductible depends upon a number of factors that cannot be covered here. Suffice to say that a deductible of $50,000 at all but the smallest center seems reasonable to most experts. Deductibles at larger centers may be as high as $250,000.

A deductible that is too low may be a costly mistake. As anyone who buys insurance for personal property knows, the lower the deductible, the higher the premium. Thus, a tenant who demands too low a deductible is simply asking to pay too high a premium. At this far end of the spectrum, an insured that buys a policy with little or no deductible (the “zero dollar” policy), is simply paying a premium for expected loss — in other words, an exchange of money at a very high cost.

For that reason, the zero dollar policy should be avoided. Of course, the reason the zero dollar policy may be popular is the unwillingness of landlords and tenants to address the issue of deductibles. For some landlords, the simple solution is to have no deductible at all (zero deductible policies are generally available to cover liability, but may not be sold for all risk — though one can buy a very low deductible all risk policy as well) and simply pass the cost of the expensive premium on to the tenant.

The smart solution is to agree upon the right balance of premium and deductible, and then agree on how the deductible will be allocated. In order to avoid unexpected spikes in expenses, the parties may agree to cap costs, or provide for cumulative carry-overs for a period of years.

Robert Machson can be reached at TotalOccupancySolutions.com, or [email protected].

keyboard_arrow_downCOMMENTS

Leave a Reply

P.Banik says:
Apr-01-2013 09:51 am

To stay financially secure it
To stay financially secure it is important to have the right insurance policy. But there are some problem areas so it is best to get insurance information before buying any policy.

P.Banik says:
Apr-01-2013 09:51 am

To stay financially secure it is important to have the right insurance policy. But there are some problem areas so it is best to get insurance information before buying any policy.

P.Banik says:
Mar-25-2013 10:18 am

Insurance is a need that we
Insurance is a need that we can not ignore especially life insurance and health insurance are extremely vital for us. But we have to be careful with the insurance company, a good insurance company would be clear about their terms and conditions and would provide instant quotes.

P.Banik says:
Mar-25-2013 10:18 am

Insurance is a need that we can not ignore especially life insurance and health insurance are extremely vital for us. But we have to be careful with the insurance company, a good insurance company would be clear about their terms and conditions and would provide instant quotes.

Polls

Consumer confidence is high. Is that reflected in your stores’ revenues?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
News

BJ’s shareholders OK acquisition by Leonard Green, CVC

BY CSA STAFF

WESTBOROUGH, Mass. — At a special meeting held Friday, BJ’s Wholesale Club stockholders approved the definitive agreement between the company and Leonard Green & Partners and CVC Capital Partners to be acquired in an all-cash transaction valued at about $2.8 billion.

BJ’s anticipates the closing of the transaction, which was announced in late June, will occur around the end of the month.

The agreement was approved by holders of approximately 72% of the company’s outstanding common stock, while holders of approximately 0.4% of the company’s outstanding common stock voted against it. The payout to shareholders is $51.25 per share in cash.

Last month, the wholesaler reported that its second-quarter results beat expectations, thanks to strong performances in key categories and higher gas profitability.

keyboard_arrow_downCOMMENTS

Leave a Reply

No comments found

Polls

Consumer confidence is high. Is that reflected in your stores’ revenues?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...