Yes. In Oregon, a landlord may require a tenant to carry renters liability insurance, but ORS 90.222 sets the rules, and several of them trip owners up. The requirement has to be in a written rental agreement, the amount you can require is capped, you cannot require it from lower-income tenants, you can only ask for interested-party status and not additional insured, and you can only require tenant insurance if you carry comparable liability coverage yourself. Miss one of those and your requirement may not hold up.
You can require it, in writing, up to a cap
ORS 90.222 lets a landlord require renters liability insurance through the written rental agreement. The amount may not exceed $100,000 per occurrence, or the customary amount required by landlords for similar properties in the same market, whichever is greater. In plain terms, you can set a reasonable liability requirement, but you cannot demand an unusually high limit just because you feel like it.
The income exemption you cannot ignore
A landlord may not require renters insurance from a tenant whose household income is at or below 50 percent of the area median income, adjusted for family size, as determined under the state’s methodology. There is also separate treatment for certain subsidized housing. This is not optional. If you apply a blanket requirement to every tenant without accounting for the exemption, part of your policy may be unenforceable against the tenants it is not allowed to reach.
Interested party yes, additional insured no
You may require the tenant to name you as an interested party, which authorizes the insurer to notify you of lapse, cancellation, non-renewal, or removal. You may not require the tenant to name you as an additional insured or to grant any status beyond interested party. This is the single most common lease error we see. If your lease demands additional insured, it is asking for something Oregon does not let you require.
The rule about your own coverage
Here is the part almost nobody knows. Under ORS 90.222, you may require a tenant to carry renters insurance only if you, the landlord, obtain and maintain comparable liability insurance, and you provide documentation of it to any tenant who asks. So requiring tenant coverage while carrying nothing comparable yourself is not just bad practice, it undercuts your own requirement. The statute also allows periodic re-verification of the tenant’s coverage, though it gives you no tool to actually do it, which is where a tracking system comes in.
Questions to ask your advisor
- Is my renters insurance requirement written into the lease, or just assumed?
- Is the liability amount I require within the cap?
- How do I handle the income exemption without guessing?
- Does my lease ask for interested party rather than additional insured?
- Do I carry comparable liability coverage, and can I produce documentation on request?
- How would I actually re-verify coverage after move-in?
If you own or manage rental property and you cannot say, today, which of your tenants are actually covered, that is the gap worth closing. We can review how you require, place, and track tenant insurance across your portfolio and show you where the exposure sits. Book a portfolio compliance review.