Cadden & Fuller LLP

Contact Our Irvine Office 888-988-3477

  • Home
  • Attorneys
    • Thomas H. Cadden
    • H. Daniel Fuller
    • William D. Chapman
    • Judy Hirahara
    • Cecilia A. Perkins
    • John B. Taylor
  • Practice Areas
    • Business Litigation
      • Breach Of Contract
      • Breach Of Fiduciary Duty
      • Creditor Remedies
      • Directors And Officers’ Litigation
      • Fraud
      • Investment / Securities Litigation
      • Unfair Business Practices
      • Unfair Competition
    • Partnership And Shareholder Disputes
      • Partnership Disputes And Litigation
      • Shareholder Disputes And Litigation
    • Real Estate Litigation
      • Breach Of Lease Disputes And Litigation
      • Purchase And Sale Litigation
      • Zoning Disputes
      • Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
      • FAQ About Easements
    • Landlord-Tenant And Commercial Lease Disputes
    • Proposition 65 Litigation
    • Insurance Disputes
      • Insurance Companies’ Failure To Indemnify
      • Insurance Companies’ Refusal To Defend
      • Bad Faith Claims
    • Employment Defense Litigation
    • Transactional Law
      • Business And Corporate Transactions
      • Real Estate Transactions
      • Labor Transactions
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Cadden & Fuller LLP
888-988-3477
  • Home
  • Attorneys
    • Thomas H. Cadden
    • H. Daniel Fuller
    • William D. Chapman
    • Judy Hirahara
    • Cecilia A. Perkins
    • John B. Taylor
  • Practice Areas
    • Business Litigation
      • Breach Of Contract
      • Breach Of Fiduciary Duty
      • Creditor Remedies
      • Directors And Officers’ Litigation
      • Fraud
      • Investment / Securities Litigation
      • Unfair Business Practices
      • Unfair Competition
    • Partnership And Shareholder Disputes
      • Partnership Disputes And Litigation
      • Shareholder Disputes And Litigation
    • Real Estate Litigation
      • Breach Of Lease Disputes And Litigation
      • Purchase And Sale Litigation
      • Zoning Disputes
      • Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
      • FAQ About Easements
    • Landlord-Tenant And Commercial Lease Disputes
    • Proposition 65 Litigation
    • Insurance Disputes
      • Insurance Companies’ Refusal To Defend
      • Insurance Companies’ Failure To Indemnify
      • Bad Faith Claims
    • Employment Defense Litigation
    • Transactional Law
      • Business And Corporate Transactions
      • Real Estate Transactions
      • Labor Transactions
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact Us

A Client-Focused Approach to Business and Real Estate Law

  1. Home
  2.  » 
  3. Commercial Real Estate
  4.  » 
  5. Avoiding CAM reconciliation disputes

Avoiding CAM reconciliation disputes

On Behalf of Cadden & Fuller LLP | Mar 31, 2021 | Commercial Real Estate |

Common area maintenance reconciliation describes the process of calculating the costs of CAM in an office building or other commercial property. Generally, the landlord or property management company divides these charges among the tenants.

Review these best practices to avoid tenant disputes about CAM reconciliation, which can be expensive and time-consuming.

Detail CAM items

Every commercial building has different CAM needs based on its size, function and features. The commercial lease should list the items covered in CAM, such as cleaning, repair, maintenance, trash services, security services, repair and maintenance of parking areas, snow removal services, landscaping services, and related needs.

The lease should also indicate other costs associated with CAM. For example, many properties charge tenants a 10% interest rate on prepaid maintenance expenses.

Establish division structure

Most commercial leases add the CAM fee on top of the base rent. The most common structure involves charging each tenant a proportional share of CAM based on the percentage of the building they occupy. Buildings that use a gross lease in which tenants pay the rent upfront in a lump sum also charge CAM as an upfront cost for the entire lease term.

The lease should also clarify the reconciliation process for CAM. Because these costs can vary over the terms of the lease, the property manager will periodically compare the actual charges to the fees paid by tenants. At that point, tenants may either receive a refund or owe an additional amount for CAM.

Creating and maintaining a comprehensive commercial lease can reduce the risk of reconciliation conflicts with tenants.

Categories

  • Business Litigation (69)
  • Business Transactions (43)
  • Commercial Real Estate (63)
  • Real Estate (24)

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Steps to take if you suspect a breach of fiduciary duty
  • Can a property owner sell a leased property during its term?
  • California securities litigation and when it may be needed
  • What to look for in a potential business merger
  • Key considerations for California mergers

Subscribe To This Blog's Feed

Contact Our Attorneys Today

Cadden & Fuller LLP
Brand
Cadden & Fuller LLP

2050 Main Street
Suite 260
Irvine, CA 92614

Irvine Office

Phone: 888-988-3477

Fax: 949-450-0650

Review Us
  • Follow
  • Follow

© 2026 Cadden & Fuller LLP • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw