No charege cams

Yesterday, the 72 fixed and 89 mobile sites were turned back on using funds from course fees, Thames Valley Police told the paper.

No charege cams-63

.action_button.action_button:active.action_button:hover.action_button:focus.action_button:hover.action_button:focus .count.action_button:hover .count.action_button:focus .count:before.action_button:hover .count:before.u-margin-left--sm.u-flex.u-flex-auto.u-flex-none.bullet.

Tenants get to pay rent (the tenant’s “cost”) PLUS the landlord’s costs PLUS a mark-up on the landlord’s costs.

Before anyone gets too upset, we know, among many other things, that: (a) it isn’t all of the landlord’s costs; (b) the markup is disguised as an administrative fee or a management fee or within a related party’s invoices; (c) most leases try to rein in or set limits on those landlord’s costs; and (d) there are some landlords who, right up front, set a “fixed” price instead of passing through their costs, thus taking the risk or reaping the reward of such pricing.

Last week’s posting about pass-through “caps,” such as for CAM Costs (or Operating Expanses), Taxes, Insurance Premiums, and the like engendered a lot of discussion here, on Linked In, and across various “back channels.” Much of that discussion wasn’t about “caps” themselves.

It was about the mystery of how the Common Area Maintenance (CAM) Cost “sausage” is made.

Leave a Reply