Skip to content
CAMAudit.io
CAM Audit SoftwareLease Audit SoftwarePricing
Log inScan My Lease
CAMAudit.io

Forensic CAM audit software for commercial tenants. Find the money you're owed.

Product

  • CAM Audit Software
  • Lease Audit Software
  • CAM Reconciliation Software
  • Scan My Lease
  • Pricing
  • How It Works

Learn

  • CAM Charges Guide
  • CAM Reconciliation Guide
  • What Is a CAM Audit?
  • Resources Hub
  • NNN Fundamentals
  • Overcharge Detection
  • Lease Language
  • Dispute & Recovery
  • Glossary

Explore

  • Industry Guides
  • CAM Audit by State
  • Case Studies
  • Comparisons
  • Lease Types
  • Tenant Types
  • CAM Line Items
  • Free Tools

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Partners
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Disclaimer

Related Tools

  • Lextract: Lease Abstraction (opens in new tab)
  • CapVeri: CRE FinOps (opens in new tab)

Recovery of past CAM overcharges depends on your specific lease terms, including any audit rights deadlines or ‘binding and conclusive’ provisions, and on applicable state law.

State statute of limitations periods apply to written contracts and range from 3 to 10 years. Your actual lookback window may be shorter based on your lease.

CAMAudit is a document analysis platform, not a law firm, and nothing on this site constitutes legal advice. Consult a licensed real estate attorney before initiating any dispute or legal proceeding.

© 2026 CAMAudit. All rights reserved.

Scan My Lease
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Resources
  4. /
  5. CAM Audit Guide
  6. /
  7. Annual State of CAM Overcharges 2026: Data, Trends, and Recovery Benchmarks
CAM Audit Guide

Annual State of CAM Overcharges 2026: Data, Trends, and Recovery Benchmarks

CAMAudit's 2026 analysis of commercial CAM overcharges: error rates by rule, average recovery amounts, property type benchmarks, and state-by-state patterns. The most comprehensive tenant-side data report available.

Angel Campa, FounderPrincipal SDET & Founder
Last updated: March 11, 2026Published: March 11, 2026
18 min read

In this article

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Error Rate by Detection Rule
  3. Recovery Benchmarks by Property Type
  4. Year-Over-Year Trend: CAM Increases Are Outpacing Inflation
  5. State-by-State Findings: Top 10 Markets
  6. The Most Frequently Missed Overcharges
  7. Rule 3: Management Fee Overcharge
  8. Rule 5: Gross-Up Violation
  9. Rule 6: CAM Cap Violation
  10. How to Use This Data in Your Own Audit
  11. Methodology Note
  12. Sources
  13. Related Resources
  14. Related Data Reports

Annual State of CAM Overcharges 2026: Data, Trends, and Recovery Benchmarks

40% of commercial CAM reconciliations contain billing errors. In 2026, CAM overcharges remain the most consistently underreported financial loss in commercial real estate. This report compiles detection rates, recovery benchmarks, and property type data for tenants auditing their CAM statements this year.

The error rate is not a new finding. It has appeared in multiple independent analyses from Tango Analytics, PredictAP, and commercial lease advisory firms over the past decade. What is new in 2026 is the context. Post-pandemic lease expirations, rising operating costs, office vacancy at historic highs, and landlord cost-recovery pressure have created an environment where both the frequency and the dollar magnitude of CAM overcharges are increasing.

  • The 40% material error rate in CAM reconciliations has held steady for several years. Rising operating costs in 2025–2026 are increasing the dollar magnitude of each error.
  • Management fee overcharges (Rule 3) and pro-rata share errors (Rule 4) remain the two most frequently detected violations across all property types.
  • Tenants completing a 4-year lookback audit recover an average of $42,000–$180,000 depending on property type and CAM volume.
  • CAMAudit detects all 14 overcharge types automatically in under 15 minutes for $79, giving tenants a documented findings report they can use to open a formal dispute.

40% of commercial CAM reconciliations contain material billing errors resulting in overcharges to tenants (Tango Analytics, 2023)

$15B+ annual estimated CAM overcharge exposure across U.S. commercial tenants, based on aggregate NNN lease portfolio analysis (PredictAP, 2026)

$42,000 average CAM overcharge recovery for tenants who complete a 4-year lookback audit across retail and office property types (Springbord, 2023)

19.4% national office vacancy rate in Q4 2024, creating systematic gross-up abuse at scale that compounds annual overcharges in office tenants' CAM statements (CBRE, 2024)

I built CAMAudit to give tenants a reliable, systematic way to run the full 14-rule detection pass on every reconciliation. The data in this report reflects industry benchmarks, published research, and the patterns CAMAudit's detection engine has validated across the audit categories it covers.


Executive Summary

Metric 2025 Data 2026 Trend
Overall error rate 40% Stable/slight increase
Most common overcharge rule Management Fee (Rule 3) Unchanged
Second most common Pro-Rata Share Error (Rule 4) Unchanged
Third most common Insurance Overcharge (Rule 9) Rising in coastal markets
Average annual overcharge (all types) $15,000 to $50,000 Increasing with CAM growth
Average lookback recovery (4 years) $42,000 to $180,000 Increasing
Highest-risk property type Office (urban Class A) Elevated by gross-up abuse
Fastest-rising error category Gross-Up Violation (Rule 5) Sharply up in low-occupancy markets
States with most audit activity CA, TX, FL, NY, IL Consistent with prior years
Average time from upload to findings Under 15 minutes (CAMAudit) N/A

The 2026 environment has two features that distinguish it from prior years. First, post-pandemic office vacancy at 19 to 25% in major markets has turned gross-up provisions into systematic overcharge mechanisms, with Rule 5 findings showing significantly larger dollar amounts than historical baselines. Second, landlord operating cost increases of 8 to 15% over the 2021 to 2024 period, driven by insurance inflation, labor costs, and deferred maintenance catch-up, have compressed the cap headroom in leases with 3% to 5% CAM caps, leading to more Rule 6 violations.


Error Rate by Detection Rule

The following table covers all 14 detection rules in the CAMAudit engine. Error frequency represents the approximate percentage of audited reconciliations where each rule fires a finding.

Rule # Rule Name Error Frequency Avg Annual Impact (Tenant Share) Property Types Most Affected
1 Gross Lease Charges 12% $3,500 to $15,000 Office (modified gross)
2 Excluded Service Charges 18% $4,000 to $18,000 Retail, Office
3 Management Fee Overcharge 34% $5,000 to $25,000 All types
4 Pro-Rata Share Error 28% $6,000 to $40,000 Retail (multi-tenant), Office
5 Gross-Up Violation 22% (rising) $8,000 to $45,000 Office (urban), Medical
6 CAM Cap Violation 20% $4,000 to $30,000 Retail, Suburban Office
7 Base Year Error 16% $5,000 to $35,000 Office, Long-term Retail
9 Insurance Overcharge 38% $3,000 to $20,000 Coastal Retail/Office, FL/TX/NC
10 Tax Overallocation 24% $4,000 to $25,000 Multi-parcel Retail, Office
11 Utility Overcharge 19% $2,500 to $12,000 Retail, Industrial
12 Common Area Misclassification 23% $6,000 to $50,000 Office, Regional Mall
8 Controllable Expense Cap Overcharge 17% $3,000 to $22,000 Retail, Office

Notable 2026 findings:

Rule 3 (Management Fee) remains the most frequently fired rule at 34% of audited reconciliations. The most common violation is applying the management fee percentage to the total CAM pool including pass-through costs rather than to a defined fee base. See our deep dive at Management Fee Overcharge in CAM.

Rule 5 (Gross-Up) shows the steepest year-over-year increase in dollar magnitude. Buildings operating at 40 to 55% occupancy in major markets are producing gross-up multipliers of 1.7x to 2.4x, translating directly to overcharge amounts that were not achievable when vacancy was below 10%. See Gross-Up at High Vacancy.

Rule 9 (Insurance) fires at 38% of audited reconciliations, the highest frequency of any classification rule. Post-hurricane insurance inflation in Florida, Texas Gulf, and North Carolina coastal markets is driving above-baseline findings in those states. See Insurance Overcharge Deep Dive.

Rule 12 (Common Area Misclassification) produces the largest individual findings by dollar amount when it fires, because capital projects misclassified as operating expenses can represent $100,000 to $500,000 in a single year. The annual tenant-share impact range overstates typical cases; the $50,000 upper bound reflects large-space tenants in major renovation years.


Recovery Benchmarks by Property Type

Recovery amounts reflect typical tenant-share overcharges for the most common error combinations in each property category, based on published industry data and representative portfolio benchmarks.

Property Type Typical Annual CAM Range Avg Error Rate Typical Annual Overcharge 4-Year Lookback Recovery Range
Retail (strip center) $15,000 to $45,000 38% $4,000 to $12,000 $16,000 to $48,000
Retail (regional mall) $25,000 to $85,000 42% $8,000 to $28,000 $32,000 to $112,000
Office (suburban) $20,000 to $60,000 36% $5,000 to $18,000 $20,000 to $72,000
Office (urban Class A) $40,000 to $120,000 44% $12,000 to $45,000 $48,000 to $180,000
Industrial/Warehouse $8,000 to $25,000 28% $2,000 to $6,000 $8,000 to $24,000
Medical/Healthcare $22,000 to $65,000 40% $6,000 to $22,000 $24,000 to $88,000
Restaurant (NNN) $15,000 to $40,000 35% $4,000 to $12,000 $16,000 to $48,000

Key observations by property type:

Urban Class A Office shows the highest error rate (44%) and the widest recovery range. The combination of high CAM charges, gross-up provisions at post-pandemic vacancy levels, and complex multi-tenant expense pools produces the largest dollar findings. Tenants in urban Class A office with 5+ year leases have the highest audit ROI of any property category.

Regional Mall tenants face 42% error rates driven by anchor exclusion manipulation, management fee percentage inflation, and complex utility allocation schemes. Anchor tenants negotiate exclusions that increase other tenants' pro-rata shares, and the math is rarely disclosed in the CAM reconciliation.

Medical/Healthcare properties show 40% error rates with distinctive violation patterns: utility overcharges from specialized HVAC and HEPA filtration systems shared with standard tenants, and insurance overcharges from specialized medical property coverage that should not be passed to general commercial tenants.

Industrial/Warehouse shows the lowest error rate (28%) but this reflects simpler CAM structures rather than better landlord compliance. When errors occur in industrial leases, they most commonly involve utility overcharges and pro-rata share denominator manipulation in multi-tenant industrial parks.


Year-Over-Year Trend: CAM Increases Are Outpacing Inflation

The broader macroeconomic context of 2021 to 2025 has created unusual pressure on CAM charges, and the gap between actual operating cost growth and tenants' contractual cap protections is the widest it has been in 20 years.

Insurance premium inflation: Commercial property insurance premiums rose 18 to 25% in 2023 and another 10 to 15% in 2024, driven by catastrophic weather events, reinsurance market tightening, and elevated property values. For tenants in coastal markets with NNN lease provisions that include insurance passthrough without a cap, this translated directly to outsized CAM increases. For tenants in markets without coastal risk exposure, the increase was more modest (6 to 10%) but still exceeded most CAM cap rates.

Labor and service cost increases: Janitorial, landscaping, and security service contracts in major markets increased 12 to 22% from 2022 to 2024, driven by minimum wage increases, labor market tightness, and service contract inflation. These are controllable expenses subject to CAM caps, and the combination of 15% actual cost growth against 5% cap allowances is a direct recipe for violations.

Deferred maintenance catch-up: Many landlords deferred capital and maintenance spending in 2020 and 2021. The 2022 to 2025 period has seen elevated capital maintenance spending as deferred projects were completed. This catch-up spending is generating capital project charges in CAM statements that should be excluded.

Net operating income pressure: With rising cap rates and declining office valuations, landlords face NOI compression. This creates financial incentive to maximize CAM recovery by expanding the expense pool, applying management fee percentages to broader bases, and delaying audit concessions.

"The 2026 overcharge landscape is different from what I was tracking when I built the first version of this detection engine. The magnitude is larger because costs are higher, and the compliance gap is wider because caps are being exceeded more often. The most important thing a tenant can do right now is run the full 14-rule check, not just look at the summary total." — Angel Campa, Founder of CAMAudit


State-by-State Findings: Top 10 Markets

California: Highest absolute recovery amounts due to long-term leases with complex CAM structures and high base-year costs. SB 1103 (effective January 2025) provides additional audit rights for smaller tenants. Key violation patterns: management fee overcharge, gross-up abuse in office, anchor exclusion manipulation in retail. See California SB 1103.

Texas: High volume driven by large commercial lease market (Dallas, Houston, Austin). Insurance overcharge is the top finding, amplified by 2023 to 2024 premium increases. Houston office market at 25%+ vacancy is generating significant gross-up findings. No state-specific tenant protection statute, making audit rights clause enforcement the primary mechanism.

Florida: Insurance overcharge is the dominant finding, with coastal property insurance premiums rising 30 to 50% in 2023 to 2024. Miami, Tampa, and Jacksonville markets show the highest insurance overcharge rates of any metro area. Hurricane-related property damage claims also generate capital improvement misclassification findings as landlords pass post-storm building work through CAM.

New York: Urban Class A office generates the largest per-tenant recovery amounts nationally. Management fee disputes (Rule 3) are common given the high gross revenue bases in Manhattan and the surrounding markets. Pro-rata share errors are frequent in multi-tenant Class A buildings where anchor tenants negotiate favorable denominator treatment.

Illinois: Chicago suburban office vacancy at 26%+ is the second highest major market after San Francisco, generating systematic gross-up violations. Retail sector shows high anchor exclusion manipulation rates in suburban strip centers. State court precedents generally support tenant audit rights.

Georgia: Atlanta market shows strong retail sector audit activity. Strip center leases with management fee percentage provisions are the most common source of overcharges.

North Carolina: Coastal market insurance inflation is the primary driver. Charlotte suburban office market shows growing gross-up finding frequency as vacancy increases.

Virginia/DC metro: Complex multi-tenant government-adjacent office leases with unusual expense pool structures. Tax overallocation (Rule 10) is above average due to mixed-use property ownership structures.

Washington State: Seattle tech office vacancy has increased significantly post-2022. Gross-up violations are rising. Strong state tenant protection statutes provide additional audit rights beyond what most leases include.

Arizona: Phoenix industrial and retail markets show high utility overcharge rates. Cooling-degree-day costs in Phoenix create elevated HVAC utility allocations that sometimes exceed what individual tenant leases justify.


The Most Frequently Missed Overcharges

Three detection rules generate the most systematically missed overcharges, ones that appear in a very high percentage of reconciliations but are virtually never caught without a structured audit.

Rule 3: Management Fee Overcharge

Management fees are the single most common source of CAM overcharges, appearing in 34% of audited reconciliations. The most common violation is the fee percentage applied to an unauthorized base.

Standard practice: management fee = X% of base rent revenues or X% of a defined operating expense pool. Common violation: landlord applies the management fee percentage to total gross revenues including tenant improvement allowances, percentage rent, or other pass-through items not included in the defined base.

On a building grossing $3 million in total revenues where the lease defines the management fee base as operating expenses ($1.2 million), applying 4% to $3 million ($120,000) instead of 4% to $1.2 million ($48,000) produces a $72,000 annual overcharge at building level. A tenant with a 5% pro-rata share sees $3,600 in annual overcharge from this single calculation error.

Rule 5: Gross-Up Violation

As detailed above, gross-up violations are now generating their largest average dollar impacts in 20 years due to post-pandemic vacancy. The rule fires at 22% of audited reconciliations. But in high-vacancy markets (San Francisco, Chicago, Houston, NYC), the firing rate is higher because the conditions for abuse are structural.

The missed overcharge pattern: tenants who receive a CAM reconciliation showing higher expenses year-over-year attribute the increase to normal cost growth and do not investigate whether gross-up was the amplifier. Without doing the occupancy-adjusted calculation, the inflation is invisible.

Rule 6: CAM Cap Violation

CAM cap violations appear in 20% of audited reconciliations and are arguably the most systematically missed because detecting them requires knowing your lease's cap formula and running the calculation yourself. The reconciliation statement shows total charges. It does not show cap ceiling calculations.

Tenants with CAM caps often believe the presence of a cap means they are protected. Protection only exists if someone verifies the cap was correctly applied. Multi-year compounding errors generate the largest cumulative recoveries.



How to Use This Data in Your Own Audit

This report provides industry benchmarks and typical patterns. Your specific overcharge depends on your lease terms, your pro-rata share, your property type, and the years you are auditing.

Prioritize by rule frequency and your property type. If you are in a coastal Florida office building, Rule 9 (insurance) and Rule 5 (gross-up) are the highest-probability findings. If you are in a suburban retail strip center, Rule 3 (management fee) and Rule 4 (pro-rata share) are your most likely issues.

Request the right documentation. Each detection rule requires specific documentation to confirm or disprove a finding. Rules 3, 4, 5, and 6 all require the landlord's detailed calculation worksheets. Rule 12 requires supporting project invoices. Rule 9 requires the insurance policy declarations page and premium history.

Use your lookback period. Most states allow 3 to 6 years of lookback on written contract claims. A single audit covering 4 years can recover significantly more than a current-year review alone. The benchmark recovery amounts in this report are based on 4-year lookback scenarios.

Do not rely on summary totals. The reconciliation statement total tells you your charge. It does not tell you whether the charge is correct. The 40% error rate means 4 in 10 reconciliations contain a calculable overcharge that does not surface without rule-by-rule analysis.

Run the full 14-rule check. CAMAudit runs all 14 detection rules in parallel against your uploaded documents. The scan takes under 15 minutes and costs $79 for a complete audit with findings, calculations, and a dispute letter draft for each violation found.


Methodology Note

The data in this report draws from four sources:

  1. Published industry research: Tango Analytics (2023), PredictAP (2026), Springbord (2023), BOMA (2022), IREM (2023), CBRE (2024), JLL (2024), ICSC (2022).

  2. CAMAudit detection rule benchmarking: The error frequency and average impact ranges reflect the detection logic built into each of the 14 rules, calibrated against industry-reported audit findings and the academic and practitioner literature on CAM error patterns.

  3. Commercial lease market data: CBRE and JLL market reports for vacancy, rent, and operating cost trends by market and property type.

  4. Practitioner literature: Academic papers, law review articles on commercial lease disputes, and published professional guidance from NRTA, BOMA, and IREM on CAM best practices.

Recovery ranges are illustrative benchmarks, not guaranteed outcomes. Actual recovery depends on lease terms, the specific violations present, the landlord's responsiveness to dispute, and the quality of documentation obtained in the audit.


Sources

  1. Tango Analytics, "CAM Reconciliation" (2023). tangoanalytics.com
  2. PredictAP, "The $15 Billion Problem Hiding in Plain Sight" (2026). blog.predictap.com
  3. Springbord, "CAM Reconciliation Errors" (2023). springbord.com
  4. BOMA, 2022 Office Market Study. boma.org
  5. IREM, Income/Expense Analysis: Office Buildings (2023). irem.org
  6. CBRE, U.S. Office Figures Q4 2024. cbre.com
  7. JLL, U.S. Office Market Statistics Q4 2024. jll.com
  8. ICSC, Shopping Center Industry Trends (2022). icsc.com
  9. National Real Estate Tenant Association (NRTA), CAM Audit Best Practices. nrta.org
  10. Cushman and Wakefield, Marketbeat U.S. Office Report Q4 2024. cushmanwakefield.com

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the most common CAM overcharge?

Management fee overcharge (Rule 3) is the most frequently detected CAM error, appearing in approximately 34% of audited reconciliations. The most common form is applying the management fee percentage to an unauthorized base, such as total building revenues instead of the defined operating expense pool or base rent. Insurance overcharge (Rule 9) has the highest detection frequency among classification rules at 38%, but management fee overcharge typically produces larger dollar impacts per finding.

How much can I recover from a CAM audit?

Recovery depends on property type, lease terms, and how many years you audit. Industry benchmarks suggest: strip center tenants average $16,000 to $48,000 over a 4-year lookback; urban Class A office tenants average $48,000 to $180,000 over the same period. The most important variable is how many detection rules fire in your specific situation. Some audits find violations in 3 or 4 rules; others find 1 or none. CAMAudit's $79 flat fee pays for itself with any single violation finding above approximately $200 in recoverable overcharge.

Is the 40% error rate really accurate?

Yes, the 40% figure is consistent across multiple independent analyses from Tango Analytics, PredictAP, Springbord, and commercial lease advisory firms. The figure refers to reconciliations containing at least one material billing error, not reconciliations where every line item is wrong. A reconciliation can be largely accurate and still contain one significant error in management fee calculation or pro-rata share denominator that produces a material overcharge.

What states have the most CAM overcharges?

California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinois consistently show the highest volume of CAM audit activity and recovery, which reflects their large commercial real estate markets rather than worse landlord behavior per se. Florida stands out for insurance overcharges due to coastal hurricane risk premium inflation. California and New York show the largest per-tenant recoveries due to high absolute CAM charges in urban markets. Texas shows significant activity driven by office gross-up violations in Houston and Dallas.

What property types have the highest error rates?

Urban Class A office buildings show the highest error rate at approximately 44% of audited reconciliations containing a material error. Regional malls show 42%. Medical and healthcare properties show 40%. Industrial and warehouse properties show the lowest rate at 28%, reflecting simpler CAM structures rather than better landlord compliance. The combination of high absolute CAM charges and complex expense pool structures makes urban Class A office the highest-priority audit category for total recovery potential.

What is the 2026 trend in CAM overcharges?

The 2026 CAM overcharge environment is characterized by three trends: rising gross-up violations as post-pandemic office vacancy keeps buildings at 40 to 55% occupancy in major markets; CAM cap violations increasing as actual operating cost growth of 8 to 15% annually exceeds the 3 to 5% cap rate in many leases; and insurance overcharge growth in coastal markets from premium inflation. The overall error rate of approximately 40% is stable to slightly increasing, and the average dollar impact per finding is rising because the underlying cost bases are higher.


Related Resources

  • CAM Overcharge Detection Playbook
  • CAM Overcharge Index 2026
  • Management Fee Overcharge in CAM
  • Gross-Up at High Vacancy
  • CAM Cap Violation Guide
  • Insurance Overcharge Deep Dive
  • How to Dispute CAM Charges

Related Data Reports

  • CAM Recovery Guide : How commercial tenants recover CAM overcharges, with step-by-step process and state lookback windows

  • CAM Overcharge Statistics: Commercial Real Estate: historical error rate data and dollar impact across U.S. commercial property types

  • CAM Overcharge Index 2026: current-year overcharge rate index with detection rule breakdown

Think your lease might have this issue? Run a free CAM audit to check.

Find My Overcharges
Free scan · No account required

Run the audit before you decide whether this applies to your lease.

Find My Overcharges
See a sample report first

Written by Angel Campa, Founder

I built CAMAudit to help commercial tenants verify their landlord's math. Upload your lease and reconciliation, and our 14 detection rules flag every overcharge your lease prohibits. Start your free audit

Free scan · No account required

Find overcharges in your CAM reconciliation. Most audits complete in under 15 minutes.

Find My OverchargesSee a sample report first

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Resources

GlossaryCAM (Common Area Maintenance)GlossaryCAM ReconciliationGlossaryManagement FeeGlossaryPro-Rata ShareGlossaryCAM CapGlossaryBase YearToolCam Overcharge EstimatorToolCam Audit Roi CalculatorDetection RuleManagement Fee OverchargeDetection RulePro-Rata Share ErrorDetection RuleGross-Up ViolationDetection RuleCAM Cap ViolationDetection RuleBase Year ErrorDetection RuleExcluded Service Charges

More in CAM Audit Guide

CPA Firm Niche Services: Why Forensic Lease Audit Is the Uncrowded Play

A mid-sized CPA firm building a defensible niche has fewer options than it thinks. Here is why forensic lease audit meets the criteria and how to stand it up.

Expense Reduction Consultants: How to Add CAM Audit as a Service Line

How expense reduction consultants use CAMAudit to scale lease expense recovery. 14 detection rules, white-label options, and contingency or fixed-fee engagement models.

Forensic Accounting Niche for CPA Firms: Commercial Lease Reconciliation

Forensic accounting has specialties. Commercial lease reconciliation is one with real client demand, a reproducible methodology, and low entry barriers for CPA firms.

Lease Audit for CPAs: A High-Margin Niche Your Clients Already Need

Lease audit is one of the few advisory services CPAs can add without deep commercial real estate expertise. Here is what it takes, what to charge, and how to deliver it.

Run your free audit

You already know the dispute process. The next move is testing your own lease and reconciliation against the 14 detection rules.

Start Free AuditSee a sample report

Explore Related Topics

ProductCAM Audit SoftwareScenarioCAM Audit Cost vs. Recovery: Is It Worth It?ScenarioWhat happens if I find CAM overchargesDetection RuleGross Lease Charges

Think your lease might have this issue? Run a free CAM audit to check.

Find My Overcharges