Woman takes Atlanta to court over uninhabited building's $76K water bill

ATLANTA - The FOX 5 I-Team has been following complaints about high Atlanta water bills where the source of the high bills is in question. Property owners are now starting to appeal their cases to Fulton County Superior Court. 

Gail Mapp owns a boarded-up building that didn't have running water for years. But yet, she accrued a nearly $81,000 water bill. 

Mapp inherited a business property after a family death. It's been vacant for more than a decade. Last spring, she gave the FOX 5 I-Team a tour of the crumbling ceramics shop. 

"No running water," she pointed out, showing us the plumbing. 

Mapp also inherited an open account with the Department of Watershed Management. For years, $13.12 was debited from her account every month. She thought at the time that it was connected to the next-door tenant - an account fee. It was a small bill, so she didn't question it. But in 2023, unexpected bills flooded in, coming to $81,082. She appealed, and had a few thousand returned, but was told she still owed the city of Atlanta $76,000. And that's how she ended up in court with an attorney appealing her case to a judge. 

"There's no swimming pool, no Jacuzzi, no irrigation system, and no working plumping at the property," said her lawyer, Monica Owens.

Mapp's attorney told an Atlanta Superior Court judge the property has been uninhabitable for about 15 years. The only change was that Watershed Management replaced the property's meter register in December 2022. After that, a $16,000 water bill arrived. Bills like this poured in for eight months.

The city said its side of the water line was not leaking. The Mapps called in several plumbers who said there was no running water on their side. Yet their bills showed in some months more than 600,000 gallons of water had been used.

The property sits on a busy stretch of Donald Lee Hollowell Parkway used by pedestrians, traffic, and other business owners.

"Based on this much water usage, the ground of the property would have likely caved in," Owens told the court. "The property would have been floating down the street. If there was a leak to that extent it certainly would have been noticeable," 

The Atlanta Water and Sewer Appeals Board speculated that the Mapps's plumber didn't know how to find a leak or that maybe the water was stolen.

"The claim of a leak or water theft basically defies logic," Owens said.

The Mapps's attorney also emphasized, that surprisingly, as these massive bills arrived, they disappeared just as quickly. 

"On Sept. 22, 2023, the department changed the water meter again. And the monthly water bills were issued in the normal amount of $13.12."

Judge Emily Richardson asked a few questions of the city's legal team, who was attending the hearing virtually.

"So, you are saying magically at that time that the register was changed, they at that point, simultaneously found the leak and stopped it at that moment," Richardson asked.

City of Atlanta senior attorney Tracey Hackett spoke for the city's group.

"They could've turned it off. They could've turned off the meter, so I don't think it's magic. I don't think they fixed it. I don't know what went on on their side of the property," she said.

The Mapps agree with the city attorney here - they didn't repair anything. But, it's the property owner's legal burden to prove that the city's equipment might be broken. 

"If the meter was faulty, how would a homeowner deal with that," Richardson asked.

"That's not the case here, your honor," Hackett said.

So here we are: Nobody can say how the city's estimated 2.6 million gallons of water poured out of the pipes, yet nobody could find it. Proof of faulty equipment could clear things up, but the city attorney says that's nearly impossible.

"They don't have any experts on their side that show that there is a problem with this equipment that we use, that is 99.9% accurate," Hackett said.

And here is a back-and-forth conversation between the judge and the city attorney about the stated accuracy of DWM's equipment:

Richardson: Is there evidence of that in the record? Did anyone testify to that?
Hackett: They may not, but they have, we use the same system, but I just wanted to clear that up.
Richardson: I understand that, but thank you, I'm not relying on that.
Hackett: Well, that's my closing, and I didn't want that in the newspaper that they said it's 99 point...
Richardson: You did say it was 99.9% accurate.
Hackett: That's just my opinion.
Richardson: That's your opinion. I'm not relying on that, so.

The judge is considering the case. FOX 5 will let you know when she makes a decision.