Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'lease'.
Found 2 results
Does this sound like a CPPC or any other violation? An agency enters into a lease with a landlord for office space. The number of square feet, the numbers of years, the base rent, and the tenant improvement allowance provided for by the base rent are stated in the lease. The lease provides that if the tenant improvement cost is less than the tenant improvement allowance then the difference will be credited to the base rent in equal monthly amounts over the term of the lease. However, if the tenant improvement cost is more than the tenant improvement allowance then the agency will pay the base rent and repay this additional amount to the landlord over the term of the lease amortized at a pre-determined interest rate. A cost estimate for the tenant improvement prepared before the lease is signed suggests that the tenant improvement will cost about 45% more than the tenant improvement allowance, but the extent and cost of the tenant improvement are unknown at the time the lease is signed. The landlord enters into a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost contract with a developer to complete the tenant improvement. There is no contract between the agency and the developer, but the arrangement is that the tenant provides specifications to the developer and the developer completes the tenant improvement per those specification at cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost. No payment is ever made by the agency to the developer and the tenant improvement cost is not adjusted up or down by the landlord. The tenant improvement is completed at a cost of about 84% more than provided for by the tenant improvement allowance, the agency occupies the office space, and payments of the base rent and additional amount plus interest by the agency to the landlord commence. I have searched for the answer to my question but haven’t found a clear answer. The CPPC dialog in the archives of this site provides some help, but Muschany references CPPC “contracts” (not present in this scenario) while the GAO references CPPC “arrangements” (possibly present in this scenario). I welcome your comments, experience, suggestions, directions to additional resources, etc.
Question: In the context of FAR Part 45 and proper disposition of government property upon task completion, how should the contractor account for and dispose of the remnants of incidental construction "modifications" (fencing, etc.) to a leased space/facilty? Background: Contractor has been tasked to provide services on a cost reimbursable contract for which a facility lease is required (deemed incidental to the services). The costs for lease, maintenance, and "modifications" to the facility were proposed and direct charged to the task. In order to render the facility suitable for the services to be performed in the facility, modifications were required on the leased premises, such as an exterior fence (for security); roll-up doors (for large vehicles), concrete and asphalt work, electrical wiring, compressed air, etc..