Square footage incorrect and no mentions of additional area in the lease
I'm hoping for some general guidance on the topic of square feet in an office lease. 

My lease is already signed and states:

"Premises commonly described as approximately 650 square feet of office space known as..."

However, when looking to replace the carpet in my suite, the installer measured it to be only about 520 square feet. 

It appears that roughly 20% of additional space was added and calculated as the payable per/foot total lease amount.

Also, there's CAM on top of the sq footage, along with a utility fee, making it a true NNN lease. 

My question and looking for some clarity:

Is it normal to be charged for 20% "extra" square footage, even with CAM and utility charges?
[{"id": "isxpsj2", "text": "https://www.reonomy.com/blog/post/usable-square-feet-versus-rentable-sqaure-feet", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "isxrl6n", "text": "Yes, you are paying for what is called a \"load factor\".  Which takes into account any hallways, elevator shafts, common area restrooms, etc.  This is very common and 20% is a market load factor.", "replies": [{"id": "isy2rqb", "text": "Even with no mention of the load factor in the lease?", "replies": [{"id": "isy5p9c", "text": "Yeah.  It's kind of scammy.  It does say approximately.  It's pretty normal and you will never make that mistake again.", "replies": [], "depth": 3}, {"id": "isyv7no", "text": "Yes, it is mentioned in your lease as \"RENTABLE square footage\" not usable.  If you look it will say rentable.  That's why you need a broker to point those things out to you.", "replies": [], "depth": 3}, {"id": "it03btm", "text": "Is there a definition of rentable area in the lease? A lot of leases mention which version of BOMA standards are being used.  Since your space is so small, I wouldn\u2019t be surprised if it is not mentioned. Honestly, the only reason why it even matters at this point is because it may impact your NNNs. How does the lease define your pro-rata share of expenses?  Is it a fixed percentage, or a share of total square footage?  If it\u2019s a share of the total, is that total explicitly mentioned?", "replies": [{"id": "it0iqlb", "text": "Neither rentable area, pro-rata, total building square footage, nor BOMA standards are mentioned in this lease. The only mention of rent throughout the lease is \"base net rent,\" and I believe that's referencing the total square feet I'm being charged. There doesn't appear to be a way to back into the actual square footage of my suite against the total in the building from any additional language in the lease that I can gather.\n\nA clause on CAM is below:\n\n*LESSEE shall pay for their proportionate share of real estate taxes, common area maintenance \u201cCAM\u201d, and property/liability insurance for the Premises by making scheduled monthly payments...*\n\nProportionate share of what? Your guess is as good as mine.\n\nUnfortunately, there's no calculation method or percentage mentioned throughout the lease, and the attorney that reviewed it did not mention any of these terms/items (or lack of them within the lease).", "replies": [{"id": "it1iuup", "text": "Trash job by the attorney.  It\u2019s not uncommon for small deals to be less detailed on the language, but neglecting to specify how the rent is calculated is pretty sloppy.", "replies": [], "depth": 5}], "depth": 4}], "depth": 3}], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "isxw3w9", "text": "Would the square footage on the lease include the load factor, so higher square footage? I had a deal where the seller was saying it was added after the fact but I didn\u2019t buy into it.", "replies": [{"id": "isyoerz", "text": "My lease does not reference load factor or any type of calculated overage, just the elevated square footage number. Good thing you caught it on that deal.", "replies": [], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "isyawdt", "text": "What you\u2019re seeing is completely normal and common. It\u2019s not trickery or anything like that. That being said, if your landlord is not that sophisticated you could always show him your measurement and see if they will either re-measure or amend the lease to go with that SF.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}, {"id": "isyoc79", "text": "There is commonly RENTABLE square footage, which is different than the USABLE square footage. The difference is a called the loss factor or load factor. This is common to all commercial leases. Rental Rates, construction allowances, etc. are based off of the rentable number.\n\nThe RSF number is usually not negotiable. If you'd like you can try to negotiate the price per square foot based on an unusually large loss factor.", "replies": [{"id": "isyok0k", "text": "I get that, but there's ZERO mention of usable vs rentable on my lease or any mention of the calculation used to factor the overage.", "replies": [{"id": "isyp1da", "text": "The usable number and any calculation are typically never mentioned in the lease, only the rentable square footage number. It's typically the tenant's responsibility to see if the space meets their needs and measure it if they wish prior to lease signing. If the space is the one you toured, and the price per month is the amount you agreed to, unfortunately it's typically buyer beware. Loss factors can also be larger in small spaces under 1,000 SF since there is more hallway/common area/restrooms typically required to service very small suites.\n\nIf there is pushback on the square footage for a small space, some landlords will simply convert the rent for the same space to a flat price per month without reference to square footage at all. That shifts the focus to negotiating only the rent rather than wasting time negotiating two factors (SF and price per SF).\n\nIt seems strange or unfair, but there are reasons why the SF is calculated this way. It keeps square footage from suite to suite or floor to floor more consistent. Otherwise, every time an interior wall is built (say for a conference room), the area located under that new wall would need to be deducted from the square footage, and all passthroughs for the building recalculated based on a slightly different percentage of usable space. Similarly, if one floor was rented by two tenants with a common hallway, and then a single tenant rented both spaces taking over the whole floor, the rentable SF of Suite 1 + Suite 2 = Total floor RSF, so it would remain constant instead of recalculating the common hallway being converted to a \"private\" hallway for that one tenant.", "replies": [{"id": "isyqbhn", "text": "Thank you. This is the answer I was looking for. It\u2019s shady practice but lesson learned. I hope this post and everyone\u2019s replies helps educate others as well.", "replies": [{"id": "isyqvky", "text": "It's a very fair question! Hope the space works out well for you.", "replies": [], "depth": 5}, {"id": "itnjovi", "text": "My 2 cents:  it's an endless battle to define the space size.  On the lease side, it really is what it is.   I would go shop another space and bring back a number if you think you can do better cost per sq./ft.  \n\n\nIf you have a bunch of common areas, those seem like fair play to add into the calculation since you do use them.  (Just my 2 cents:  on a 650 sq. ft. space, I don't think there is a lot to push on here!  But, we had a $500k condo purchase and we negotiated down $50k bringing up actual space vs. stated space.)", "replies": [], "depth": 5}], "depth": 4}], "depth": 3}], "depth": 2}], "depth": 1}, {"id": "it0kfug", "text": "Load factor and BOMA measures are not internal wall to wall.  20% is fine.  Unless you don't want exterior walls, fire corridors, HVAC ducting, emergency egress, bathrooms, etc.", "replies": [], "depth": 1}]