Plaintiffs in BGE gas regulator lawsuit seek damages for unwanted installations - Baltimore Sun

Plaintiffs in BGE gas regulator lawsuit seek damages for unwanted installations

Baltimore homeowners who are suing Baltimore Gas and Electric Co. over its controversial practice of placing gas pressure regulators on city home facades are seeking damages for what they consider unlawfully required installations.

The plaintiffs have expanded their class action lawsuit to include any BGE service area customers in Maryland who had an external gas regulator installed over their objections.

The five-count amended complaint filed Monday in Baltimore Circuit Court seeks compensatory and punitive damages for what it says were thousands of regulators that BGE unlawfully required customers to install in central Maryland. The lawsuit accuses BGE of trespass to property, contract violations, public utility discrimination, constructive fraud and negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiffs seek damages that could include removal and relocation of equipment.

BGE officials had not responded to the amended lawsuit as of Tuesday morning.

Earlier this month, the Maryland Public Service Commission ruled in homeowners’ favor in deciding that residential gas customers can choose whether gas pressure regulators are installed inside or outside their homes, except under some circumstances. The commission, which regulates utilities, reached its decision after a public hearing and a monthslong campaign by homeowners to stop BGE from installing external regulators over homeowners’ objections or shutting off gas service to those who objected.

Additionally, Baltimore Circuit Court Judge John Nugent had extended a temporary restraining order, with BGE’s consent, barring the utility from installing external regulators without a homeowner’s consent.

“What remains unresolved is adequate and appropriate relief for the thousands of customers who have already been unlawfully and mercilessly forced by BGE to have regulators installed outside their homes and punitive measures for BGE’s misconduct,” said Thiru Vignarajah, an attorney for the plaintiffs, in a news release Tuesday.

The lawsuit argues that customers harmed by BGE’s illegal actions are entitled to a remedy. It accuses BGE of trespassing on thousands of properties, using a limited right of reasonable access to existing equipment as a pretext for entering homes. It also accuses the utility of breach of contractual obligations to thousands of paying customers by adding a new condition to obtain gas service that did not exist previously. And it says BGE wrongfully discriminated against such customers by giving other customers a choice of indoor regulators.

“BGE, a monopoly utility with no competitors and limitless resources, did all of this to maximize its profits, shift away liability for the inevitable fires and fatalities outdoor regulators would cause, and bind Maryland customers to regressive gas infrastructure for decades to come,” the lawsuit says.

The Evening Sun

Plaintiffs named in the lawsuit are BGE customers who were required to have external gas pressure regulators installed even though the equipment was not required by law. Plaintiffs argue that external installation’s damaged their property, created undisclosed and unnecessary safety hazards, increased homeowner liability, diminished the property’s value and caused undue pain and suffering.

The lawsuit cites BGE’s numbers showing the utility installed 6,108 external regulators in 2021 and 2022, spending an average of $18,000 on each property. The total expense of $138 million, including 1,542 internal regulators BGE allowed some customers to install, can be passed on to customers, the lawsuit says.

The utility has been installing external gas regulators as part of a larger initiative to upgrade its low pressure gas system to high pressure. Residents and the utility have clashed over the use of and necessity for the gas equipment and whether it enhances public safety or poses serious dangers.

After BGE began defaulting to external installations in 2021 and work moved into urban neighborhoods with historic homes lining highly trafficked streets, residents began pushing back, citing safety and aesthetic concerns. Many have been upset about the use of the bulky regulators outside homes when interior options exist.

BGE has said it plans to comply with the PSC’s recent order, but maintains that placing gas regulators outdoors is safer and reduces the risk of a catastrophic gas event, a position in line with industry experts, engineering best practices and National Transportation Safety Board recommendations.

Utility officials told public service commissioners at a hearing last month that the work is being done in response to and to avoid catastrophic incidents such as gas explosions that have occurred in the past in Maryland and elsewhere.

Vignarajah and some of the new plaintiffs planned to hold a press conference Tuesday morning to encourage others who were required to obtain external regulators to join the lawsuit.