Public record
Riverside County CA: management fee percentage cap overcharge case study
A public-record CAM case study showing $4,400 in management fee overcharges: landlord billed 11.1% effective rate against a 5% contractual cap.
What happened
Riverside County leased office space at the Galleria at Tyler under a NNN lease capping management fees at 5% of operating expenses. The landlord billed $8,000 in management fees on a $72,000 base, an effective rate of over 11%. The correct fee was $3,600. The $4,400 excess is a straightforward percentage cap violation identified through a California Public Records Act request.
Findings from the pipeline
Rule 3
Management Fee Overcharge
$4,400
Management fee of $8,000.00 exceeds the lease cap of 5.00% applied to base $72,000.00. Correct fee: $3,600.00. Overcharge: $4,400.00.
Lease evidence
Management Fee shall not exceed five percent (5%) of Operating Expenses. Section 7.3.
Section 7.3, page 12
Math proof
billed=8000.00, cap_rate=0.05, base=72000.00, max_allowed=3600.00, overcharge=4400.00
Lease evidence
- Pro-rata share fixed at 12.00% (21,600 SF / 180,000 SF).
- Management fee capped at 5% of Operating Expenses per Section 7.3.
- NNN lease structure: tenant pays pro-rata share of all operating expenses.
Why this matters for your firm
Management fee caps are one of the most common sources of CAM overcharges. Landlords often bill a flat dollar fee that looks reasonable in isolation but exceeds the percentage cap when checked against the actual operating expense base. Government tenants are particularly exposed because their lease files are public record, making cross-verification straightforward.
Dispute letter draft excerpt
Request for Cooperative Review of Certain Line Items. The automated review flagged an apparent discrepancy of $4,400.00 for the 2022 reconciliation year tied to a management fee exceeding the contractual 5% cap.
Frequently asked questions
What findings did CAMAudit surface in the Riverside County Board of Supervisors case?
CAMAudit flagged 1 finding with an apparent overcharge of $4,400. Each finding cites the specific detection rule, dollar amount, and the lease provision that grounds the dispute.
Can my firm reproduce these findings on a live client engagement?
Yes. Your firm uploads the lease and CAM bill. CAMAudit checks them against the same rule set. Your firm reviews the findings. Then your firm sends the branded report to the client.
Is Office a common property type for CAM audit engagements?
CAMAudit handles all commercial property types: retail, office, industrial, mixed-use, and specialty. The detection rules apply wherever a tenant pays CAM or operating expenses under a lease with specific definitions, caps, or exclusion lists.
What is a dispute letter draft and does CAMAudit generate one?
A dispute letter draft is a factual starting point that specifies each overcharge by rule, dollar amount, and lease provision. CAMAudit generates a draft grounded in the specific audit findings for advisor and counsel review.
Next engagement
Run these same detection rules on your client engagements
Upload a client lease and CAM bill. CAMAudit applies the same rule set used in this case study. Your firm reviews the findings and sends the branded report to the client.
Public-record note
This page summarizes public-record documents and CAMAudit output for educational and marketing purposes. It does not imply endorsement by Riverside County Board of Supervisors or any third party. Readers should review the underlying lease, statement, and dispute timeline for their own facts.