percentage rents , which represent additional rents based upon the level of sales achieved by certain tenants , are recognized at the end of the lease year or earlier if we have determined the required sales level is achieved and the percentage rents are collectible . real estate tax and other cost reimbursements are recognized on an accrual basis over the periods in which the related expenditures are incurred . for a tenant to terminate its lease agreement prior to the end of the agreed term , we may require that they pay a fee to cancel the lease agreement . lease termination fees for which the tenant has relinquished control of the space are generally recognized on the termination date . when a lease is terminated early but the tenant continues to control the space under a modified lease agreement , the lease termination fee is generally recognized evenly over the remaining term of the modified lease agreement . current accounts receivable from tenants primarily relate to contractual minimum rent and percentage rent as well as real estate tax and other cost reimbursements . accounts receivable from straight-line rent is typically longer term in nature and relates to the cumulative amount by which straight-line rental income recorded to date exceeds cash rents billed to date under the contractual lease agreement . we make estimates of the collectability of our current accounts receivable and straight-line rents receivable which requires significant judgment by management . the collectability of receivables is affected by numerous factors including current economic conditions , bankruptcies , and the ability of the tenant to perform under the terms of their lease agreement . while we make estimates of potentially uncollectible amounts and provide an allowance for them through bad debt expense , actual collectability could differ from those estimates which could affect our net income . with respect to the allowance for current uncollectible tenant receivables , we assess the collectability of outstanding receivables by evaluating such factors as nature and age of the receivable , past history and current financial condition of the specific tenant including our assessment of the tenant 's ability to meet its contractual lease obligations , and the status of any pending disputes or lease negotiations with the tenant . at december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , our allowance for doubtful accounts was $ 17.6 million and $ 18.7 million , respectively . historically , we have recognized bad debt expense between 0.4 % and 1.3 % of rental income and it was 0.5 % in 2011 reflecting positive economic changes and their impact to our tenants . a change in the estimate of collectability of a receivable would result in a change to our allowance for doubtful accounts and correspondingly bad debt expense and net income . for example , in the event our estimates were not accurate and we were required to increase our allowance by 1 % of rental income , our bad debt expense would have increased and our net income would have decreased by $ 5.4 million . due to the nature of the accounts receivable from straight-line rents , the collection period of these amounts typically extends beyond one year . our experience relative to unbilled straight-line rents is that a portion of the amounts otherwise recognizable as revenue is never billed to or collected from tenants due to early lease terminations , lease modifications , bankruptcies and other factors . accordingly , the extended collection period for straight-line rents along with our evaluation of tenant credit risk may result in the nonrecognition of a portion of straight-line rental income until the collection of such income is reasonably assured . if our evaluation of tenant credit risk changes indicating more straight-line revenue is reasonably collectible than previously estimated and realized , the additional straight-line rental income is recognized as revenue . if our evaluation of tenant credit risk changes indicating a portion of realized straight-line rental income is no longer collectible , a reserve and bad debt expense is recorded . at december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , accounts receivable include approximately $ 50.5 million and $ 45.6 million , respectively , related to straight-line rents . correspondingly , these estimates of collectability have a direct impact on our net income . real estate the nature of our business as an owner , redeveloper and operator of retail shopping centers and mixed-use properties means that we invest significant amounts of capital . depreciation and maintenance costs relating to our properties constitute substantial costs for us as well as the industry as a whole . we capitalize real estate investments and depreciate them on a straight-line basis in accordance with gaap and consistent with industry standards based on our best estimates of the assets ' physical and economic useful lives . we periodically review the estimated lives of our assets and implement changes , as necessary , to these estimates and , therefore , to our depreciation rates . these reviews may take into account such factors as the 29 historical retirement and replacement of our assets , expected redevelopments , the repairs required to maintain the condition of our assets , and general economic and real estate factors . certain events could occur that would materially affect our estimates and assumptions related to depreciation . unforeseen competition or changes in customer shopping habits could substantially alter our assumptions regarding our ability to realize the expected return on investment in the property and therefore reduce the economic life of the asset and affect the amount of depreciation expense to be charged against both the current and future revenues . these assessments have a direct impact on our net income . the longer the economic useful life , the lower the depreciation expense will be for that asset in a fiscal period , which in turn will increase our net income . story_separator_special_tag on april 29 , 2011 , we repaid the $ 31.7 million mortgage loan on federal plaza which had an original maturity date of june 1 , 2011. on june 1 , 2011 , we repaid the $ 5.6 million mortgage loan on tysons station which had an original maturity date of september 1 , 2011. on july 7 , 2011 , we replaced our existing $ 300.0 million revolving credit facility with a new $ 400.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility . this new revolving credit facility matures on july 6 , 2015 , subject to a one-year extension at our option , and bears interest at libor plus 115 basis points . the spread over libor is subject to adjustment based on our credit rating . on november 22 , 2011 , we entered into a $ 275.0 million unsecured term loan which bears interest at libor plus 145 basis points . the spread over libor is subject to adjustment based on our credit rating . the loan matures on november 21 , 2018 and is prepayable without penalty after three years . we entered into two interest rate swap agreements to fix the variable rate portion of our $ 275.0 million term loan at 1.72 % from december 1 , 2011 through november 1 , 2018 . the swap agreements effectively fixed the rate on the term loan at 3.17 % . both swaps were designated and qualified as cash flow hedges and are recorded at fair value . in connection with the acquisition of montrose crossing on december 27 , 2011 , our joint venture that owns the property entered into an $ 80.0 million mortgage loan that bears interest at 4.20 % and matures on january 10 , 2022 . as montrose crossing is a consolidated property , 100 % of the mortgage loan is included in our consolidated balance sheet . in connection with the acquisition of plaza el segundo on december 30 , 2011 , we assumed our pro-rata share of an existing mortgage loan with a face amount of $ 175.0 million and a fair value of approximately $ 185.6 million . as plaza el segundo is a consolidated property , 100 % of the mortgage loan is included in our consolidated balance sheet . the mortgage loan requires monthly interest only payments through maturity , bears interest at a weighted average rate of 6.33 % and matures on august 5 , 2017 . mortgage loan receivable refinancing prior to june 30 , 2011 , we were the lender on a first and second mortgage loan on a shopping center and an adjacent commercial building in norwalk , connecticut . our carrying amount of the loans was approximately $ 18.3 million . the loans were in default and foreclosure proceedings had been filed , however , we were in negotiations with the borrower to refinance the loans . on june 30 , 2011 , we refinanced the existing loans with a first mortgage loan which had an initial principal balance of $ 11.9 million , bears interest at 6.0 % , and matures on june 30 , 2014 , subject to a one year extension option . the loan is secured by the shopping center in norwalk , connecticut . as part of the refinancing , we received approximately $ 8.7 million in cash . because the loans were in default , we had certain rights under the first mortgage loan agreement that gave us the ability to direct the activities that most significantly impacted the shopping center . although we did not exercise those rights , the existence of those rights in the loan agreement resulted in the entity being a variable interest entity ( `` vie `` ) . additionally , given our investment in both the first and second mortgage on the property , the overall decline in fair market value since the loans were initiated , and the default status of the loans , we also had the obligation to absorb losses or rights to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the vie . consequently , we were the primary beneficiary of this vie and consolidated the shopping center and adjacent building from march 30 , 2010 to june 29 , 2011. our investment in the property is included in “ assets held for sale/disposal ” in the consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2010 and the operations of the entity are included in “ discontinued operations ” for all periods presented . in conjunction with the refinancing of the loans , we re-evaluated our status as the primary beneficiary of the vie . because the loan is not in default , we no longer have those certain rights that give us the ability to control the activities that most significantly impact the shopping center . our current involvement in the property is solely as the lender on the mortgage loan with protective rights as the lender . therefore , we are no longer the primary beneficiary and deconsolidated the entity as of 33 june 30 , 2011 . the mortgage loan receivable was recorded at its estimated fair value of $ 11.9 million and we recognized a $ 2.0 million gain on deconsolidation as part of the refinancing which is included in “ discontinued operations - gain on deconsolidation of vie ” for 2011 . as of december 31 , 2011 , the loan was performing and the carrying amount of the mortgage loan was $ 11.7 million which is included in “ mortgage notes receivable ” on the balance sheet . this amount also reflects our maximum exposure to loss related to this investment . the change in design of the entity including the refinancing of the loan was a vie reconsideration event . given that the loan is no longer in default , we , as lender , do not have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the

net cash provided by operating activities decreased $ 12.0 million to $ 244.7 million during 2011 from $ 256.7 million during 2010 . the decrease was primarily attributable to the $ 16.2 million payment of the final judgment related to a previously disclosed lawsuit offset by higher net income before certain non-cash items . net cash used in investing activities increased $ 9.3 million to $ 196.4 million during 2011 from $ 187.1 million during 2010 . 42 the increase was primarily attributable to : $ 53.4 million increase in capital investments , and $ 46.4 million increase in acquisitions of real estate primarily due to the december 2011 montrose crossing acquisition , partially offset by $ 34.6 million cash received from our newbury street partnership due to the sale of its properties in october 2011 , $ 23.7 million in proceeds from sales of real estate primarily from the sale of feasterville shopping center in july 2011 , $ 10.5 million acquisition of a first mortgage loan in march 2010 , $ 10.0 million decrease in contributions to the newbury street partnership due to the $ 16.7 million initial investment in 2010 , and $ 8.7 million payment received in june 2011 related to the refinancing of a mortgage loan receivable . net cash provided by financing activities increased $ 192.9 million to $ 3.7 million during 2011 from $ 189.2 million used in 2010 . the increase was primarily attributable to : $ 272.2 million in net proceeds from the term loan in november 2011 , $ 170.4 million decrease in repayment of mortgages , capital leases and notes payable due substantially to the $ 250.0 million payoff of our term loan in 2010 offset by the payoff of two mortgages totaling $ 37.4 million in 2011 , and $ 150.3 million increase in net proceeds from the issuance of common shares due primarily to the sale of 1.7 million shares under our atm equity program entered into in february 2011 , partially offset by $ 157.7 million increase in net repayments on our revolving credit facility , net of financing costs , $ 148.5 million in net proceeds from the issuance of 5.90


 Write a concise suspicious activity report of the following text delimited by triple backquotes. Return your response as a formal report which covers the key points highlighting the location,dates,entity names and account holder information in chronological order of the text.
     ```net cash provided by operating activities decreased $ 12.0 million to $ 244.7 million during 2011 from $ 256.7 million during 2010 . the decrease was primarily attributable to the $ 16.2 million payment of the final judgment related to a previously disclosed lawsuit offset by higher net income before certain non-cash items . net cash used in investing activities increased $ 9.3 million to $ 196.4 million during 2011 from $ 187.1 million during 2010 . 42 the increase was primarily attributable to : $ 53.4 million increase in capital investments , and $ 46.4 million increase in acquisitions of real estate primarily due to the december 2011 montrose crossing acquisition , partially offset by $ 34.6 million cash received from our newbury street partnership due to the sale of its properties in october 2011 , $ 23.7 million in proceeds from sales of real estate primarily from the sale of feasterville shopping center in july 2011 , $ 10.5 million acquisition of a first mortgage loan in march 2010 , $ 10.0 million decrease in contributions to the newbury street partnership due to the $ 16.7 million initial investment in 2010 , and $ 8.7 million payment received in june 2011 related to the refinancing of a mortgage loan receivable . net cash provided by financing activities increased $ 192.9 million to $ 3.7 million during 2011 from $ 189.2 million used in 2010 . the increase was primarily attributable to : $ 272.2 million in net proceeds from the term loan in november 2011 , $ 170.4 million decrease in repayment of mortgages , capital leases and notes payable due substantially to the $ 250.0 million payoff of our term loan in 2010 offset by the payoff of two mortgages totaling $ 37.4 million in 2011 , and $ 150.3 million increase in net proceeds from the issuance of common shares due primarily to the sale of 1.7 million shares under our atm equity program entered into in february 2011 , partially offset by $ 157.7 million increase in net repayments on our revolving credit facility , net of financing costs , $ 148.5 million in net proceeds from the issuance of 5.90
```    
 Suspicious Activity Report : percentage rents , which represent additional rents based upon the level of sales achieved by certain tenants , are recognized at the end of the lease year or earlier if we have determined the required sales level is achieved and the percentage rents are collectible . real estate tax and other cost reimbursements are recognized on an accrual basis over the periods in which the related expenditures are incurred . for a tenant to terminate its lease agreement prior to the end of the agreed term , we may require that they pay a fee to cancel the lease agreement . lease termination fees for which the tenant has relinquished control of the space are generally recognized on the termination date . when a lease is terminated early but the tenant continues to control the space under a modified lease agreement , the lease termination fee is generally recognized evenly over the remaining term of the modified lease agreement . current accounts receivable from tenants primarily relate to contractual minimum rent and percentage rent as well as real estate tax and other cost reimbursements . accounts receivable from straight-line rent is typically longer term in nature and relates to the cumulative amount by which straight-line rental income recorded to date exceeds cash rents billed to date under the contractual lease agreement . we make estimates of the collectability of our current accounts receivable and straight-line rents receivable which requires significant judgment by management . the collectability of receivables is affected by numerous factors including current economic conditions , bankruptcies , and the ability of the tenant to perform under the terms of their lease agreement . while we make estimates of potentially uncollectible amounts and provide an allowance for them through bad debt expense , actual collectability could differ from those estimates which could affect our net income . with respect to the allowance for current uncollectible tenant receivables , we assess the collectability of outstanding receivables by evaluating such factors as nature and age of the receivable , past history and current financial condition of the specific tenant including our assessment of the tenant 's ability to meet its contractual lease obligations , and the status of any pending disputes or lease negotiations with the tenant . at december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , our allowance for doubtful accounts was $ 17.6 million and $ 18.7 million , respectively . historically , we have recognized bad debt expense between 0.4 % and 1.3 % of rental income and it was 0.5 % in 2011 reflecting positive economic changes and their impact to our tenants . a change in the estimate of collectability of a receivable would result in a change to our allowance for doubtful accounts and correspondingly bad debt expense and net income . for example , in the event our estimates were not accurate and we were required to increase our allowance by 1 % of rental income , our bad debt expense would have increased and our net income would have decreased by $ 5.4 million . due to the nature of the accounts receivable from straight-line rents , the collection period of these amounts typically extends beyond one year . our experience relative to unbilled straight-line rents is that a portion of the amounts otherwise recognizable as revenue is never billed to or collected from tenants due to early lease terminations , lease modifications , bankruptcies and other factors . accordingly , the extended collection period for straight-line rents along with our evaluation of tenant credit risk may result in the nonrecognition of a portion of straight-line rental income until the collection of such income is reasonably assured . if our evaluation of tenant credit risk changes indicating more straight-line revenue is reasonably collectible than previously estimated and realized , the additional straight-line rental income is recognized as revenue . if our evaluation of tenant credit risk changes indicating a portion of realized straight-line rental income is no longer collectible , a reserve and bad debt expense is recorded . at december 31 , 2011 and 2010 , accounts receivable include approximately $ 50.5 million and $ 45.6 million , respectively , related to straight-line rents . correspondingly , these estimates of collectability have a direct impact on our net income . real estate the nature of our business as an owner , redeveloper and operator of retail shopping centers and mixed-use properties means that we invest significant amounts of capital . depreciation and maintenance costs relating to our properties constitute substantial costs for us as well as the industry as a whole . we capitalize real estate investments and depreciate them on a straight-line basis in accordance with gaap and consistent with industry standards based on our best estimates of the assets ' physical and economic useful lives . we periodically review the estimated lives of our assets and implement changes , as necessary , to these estimates and , therefore , to our depreciation rates . these reviews may take into account such factors as the 29 historical retirement and replacement of our assets , expected redevelopments , the repairs required to maintain the condition of our assets , and general economic and real estate factors . certain events could occur that would materially affect our estimates and assumptions related to depreciation . unforeseen competition or changes in customer shopping habits could substantially alter our assumptions regarding our ability to realize the expected return on investment in the property and therefore reduce the economic life of the asset and affect the amount of depreciation expense to be charged against both the current and future revenues . these assessments have a direct impact on our net income . the longer the economic useful life , the lower the depreciation expense will be for that asset in a fiscal period , which in turn will increase our net income . story_separator_special_tag on april 29 , 2011 , we repaid the $ 31.7 million mortgage loan on federal plaza which had an original maturity date of june 1 , 2011. on june 1 , 2011 , we repaid the $ 5.6 million mortgage loan on tysons station which had an original maturity date of september 1 , 2011. on july 7 , 2011 , we replaced our existing $ 300.0 million revolving credit facility with a new $ 400.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility . this new revolving credit facility matures on july 6 , 2015 , subject to a one-year extension at our option , and bears interest at libor plus 115 basis points . the spread over libor is subject to adjustment based on our credit rating . on november 22 , 2011 , we entered into a $ 275.0 million unsecured term loan which bears interest at libor plus 145 basis points . the spread over libor is subject to adjustment based on our credit rating . the loan matures on november 21 , 2018 and is prepayable without penalty after three years . we entered into two interest rate swap agreements to fix the variable rate portion of our $ 275.0 million term loan at 1.72 % from december 1 , 2011 through november 1 , 2018 . the swap agreements effectively fixed the rate on the term loan at 3.17 % . both swaps were designated and qualified as cash flow hedges and are recorded at fair value . in connection with the acquisition of montrose crossing on december 27 , 2011 , our joint venture that owns the property entered into an $ 80.0 million mortgage loan that bears interest at 4.20 % and matures on january 10 , 2022 . as montrose crossing is a consolidated property , 100 % of the mortgage loan is included in our consolidated balance sheet . in connection with the acquisition of plaza el segundo on december 30 , 2011 , we assumed our pro-rata share of an existing mortgage loan with a face amount of $ 175.0 million and a fair value of approximately $ 185.6 million . as plaza el segundo is a consolidated property , 100 % of the mortgage loan is included in our consolidated balance sheet . the mortgage loan requires monthly interest only payments through maturity , bears interest at a weighted average rate of 6.33 % and matures on august 5 , 2017 . mortgage loan receivable refinancing prior to june 30 , 2011 , we were the lender on a first and second mortgage loan on a shopping center and an adjacent commercial building in norwalk , connecticut . our carrying amount of the loans was approximately $ 18.3 million . the loans were in default and foreclosure proceedings had been filed , however , we were in negotiations with the borrower to refinance the loans . on june 30 , 2011 , we refinanced the existing loans with a first mortgage loan which had an initial principal balance of $ 11.9 million , bears interest at 6.0 % , and matures on june 30 , 2014 , subject to a one year extension option . the loan is secured by the shopping center in norwalk , connecticut . as part of the refinancing , we received approximately $ 8.7 million in cash . because the loans were in default , we had certain rights under the first mortgage loan agreement that gave us the ability to direct the activities that most significantly impacted the shopping center . although we did not exercise those rights , the existence of those rights in the loan agreement resulted in the entity being a variable interest entity ( `` vie `` ) . additionally , given our investment in both the first and second mortgage on the property , the overall decline in fair market value since the loans were initiated , and the default status of the loans , we also had the obligation to absorb losses or rights to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the vie . consequently , we were the primary beneficiary of this vie and consolidated the shopping center and adjacent building from march 30 , 2010 to june 29 , 2011. our investment in the property is included in “ assets held for sale/disposal ” in the consolidated balance sheet at december 31 , 2010 and the operations of the entity are included in “ discontinued operations ” for all periods presented . in conjunction with the refinancing of the loans , we re-evaluated our status as the primary beneficiary of the vie . because the loan is not in default , we no longer have those certain rights that give us the ability to control the activities that most significantly impact the shopping center . our current involvement in the property is solely as the lender on the mortgage loan with protective rights as the lender . therefore , we are no longer the primary beneficiary and deconsolidated the entity as of 33 june 30 , 2011 . the mortgage loan receivable was recorded at its estimated fair value of $ 11.9 million and we recognized a $ 2.0 million gain on deconsolidation as part of the refinancing which is included in “ discontinued operations - gain on deconsolidation of vie ” for 2011 . as of december 31 , 2011 , the loan was performing and the carrying amount of the mortgage loan was $ 11.7 million which is included in “ mortgage notes receivable ” on the balance sheet . this amount also reflects our maximum exposure to loss related to this investment . the change in design of the entity including the refinancing of the loan was a vie reconsideration event . given that the loan is no longer in default , we , as lender , do not have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the

