Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag, along with several other Pacific Palisades property owners, filed lawsuits regarding damage to their properties during the Palisades fire. sued the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power over the losses, adding to a growing list of lawsuits against the city.
The “Laguna Beach” and “The Hills” reality stars who lost their homes in the fire filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Tuesday alleging reverse condemnation — a legal concept that compensates property owners for damages caused by public use.
In the case, the reality TV personality and more than 20 other property owners, tenants and individuals who suffered losses as a result of the Palisades fires blame the city and the utility’s operations of water and related infrastructure for the impact on their lives. Damage was caused.
The complaint cites reports that the Santa Ynez Reservoir, which is designed to serve the Pacific Palisades, was closed and drained before the Jan. 7 fire. The 117-million-gallon reservoir has been closed for repairs since early 2024. The reservoir remains empty, and the DWP’s water chief told The Times that repair work, which was requested to begin “as soon as possible” in January 2024, will not take place until April or May 2025. It takes months to complete.
The situation at the reservoir sparked outrage against the DWP and its leadership, prompting Gov. Gavin Newsom to order an investigation into the loss of hydrant water pressure that has hampered the city’s firefighting efforts. At least two other lawsuits have been filed.
Former and current DWP officials acknowledge that if the Santa Ynez Reservoir fills up, high-elevation areas in the Palisades will experience greater water pressure, but it’s unclear how long that will last. It’s unclear whether the reservoir will have a significant impact on firefighters’ ability to fight the blaze, which has burned 23,400 acres. As of Thursday, more than two weeks after the fire broke out, the fire was 72% contained.
The Palisades Fire, fueled by extremely dry weather conditions and vegetation, coupled with hurricane-force winds, killed 11 people, destroyed 6,662 structures and damaged 890 structures. High winds prevented an immediate save. They say municipal water systems are not equipped to handle such fires.
But the Pratts and the plaintiffs accuse the water board of making a “conscious decision to operate the water system with the reservoirs empty and unavailable as a ‘cost-saving’ measure” by limiting the flow of water to the area’s fire hydrants and water tankers. flow. They also accuse the defendants of designing the water system for public use “resulting in it not having sufficient water pressure to extinguish urban fires.”
The complaint obtained by The Times on Thursday alleges that the city and utility companies have taken measures to implement facilities, reservoirs, water systems, fire hydrants, infrastructure and other public improvements that “pose inherent fire hazards and risks to private property.” They also accused the city and utility companies of taking a “known, calculated risk” that private property would be damaged and destroyed by the fire.
“It is understood and believed that the Palisades Fire was an unavoidable consequence of the planning and construction of the water system for Pacific Palisades and its surrounding areas,” the complaint states. “The system was bound to fail, and this failure was “Significant factors that caused the plaintiff to suffer the losses alleged in this complaint.”
The damages were “primarily caused by the conduct of Defendants… and each of them… contributed to Plaintiff’s damages,” the complaint states.
The defendants, who are seeking damages to be determined at trial, say they were not adequately compensated for property that was damaged or destroyed, which the complaint says “constitutes defendants’ misappropriation of or damage to plaintiff’s property and that they each Not being fairly compensated.
They also want to recover the cost of repairing or replacing the lost or destroyed property, any lost wages or business profits, and living expenses incurred as a result of losing the use of their home, as well as legal fees.
Represented by city attorney. Hydee Feldstein Soto’s office and the DWP did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment Thursday.
The Pratts have spoken extensively on social media and in news interviews about their losses in the fire and their efforts to raise funds after the fire. Earlier this month, Spencer Pratt made a public appeal to fans to buy and stream his wife’s 2010 album Superficial, which hit No. 1 on the iTunes charts. He also said he has made “life-changing” money on TikTok from individuals seeking to help their families recover. A spokesman for the couple did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.
Meanwhile, at least 20 lawsuits have been filed against Southern California Edison over the Eaton Fire, which burned at the same time as the Palisade Fire and leveled large swaths of Altadena. The plaintiff claims there is evidence that the Eaton fire was caused by SCE’s electrical equipment.
Times staff writers Matt Hamilton and David Zanicer contributed to this report.
