Select Page

CLICK HERE FOR SMALL CLAIMS FORM – PDF

ADDENDUM TO SMALL CLAIMS COMPLAINT – WORD

(Use of these suggested forms does not create an attorney-client relationship.)

 

There are several versions of Addendum A:

 

 For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their analog meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

 For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their analog meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

 For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their GE digital non-communicating meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

 For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have already had their GE digital non-communicating meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

For customers who live in apartments with more than four units, who cannot opt out, and whose analog meters have not yet been replaced with an advanced meter

 

For customers who live in apartments with more than four units, who cannot opt out, and whose analog meter have already been replaced with an advanced meter

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their analog meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

Seattle City Light has stated it plans to replace our analog electric meter with an electronic digital meter known as an advanced meter.  

 

Our analog electric meter contains a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. It cannot be hacked. It is all-metal and cannot catch fire. It consumes only a minute amount of electricity to operate. It directly and accurately measures total watt-hours used. It does not create stray current. It does not collect personal and private information. It did not come with a license to sell data collected. It is inexpensive to buy and will last 40 years. It does not cause cancer.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, they had in mind an analog meter with the foregoing qualities.

 

The so-called advanced meter which Seattle City Light has stated that it plans to install includes no path to ground. It has a puny surge protection. It cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore it catches fire. It creates stray current. It can be hacked. It collects information on our every electrical activity and reports this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. It presumes the existence of a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. It costs more than an analog meter and will last only five to seven years.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which we or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The coming installation of said meters has caused us great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit us with, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Since the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation will be a trespass and a taking of our property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of so-called smart meters will be a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, one must pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month must be paid in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

 

We would like to ask that that this court enjoin the installation or these so-called advanced meters and order that those installed be removed and that analog meters be returned. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

 

 

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their analog meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

Seattle City Light has replaced our analog electric meter with an electronic digital meter known as an advanced meter. 

 

Our analog electric meter contained a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. It could not be hacked. It was all-metal and could not catch fire. It consumed only a minute amount of electricity to operate. It directly and accurately measured total watt-hours used. It did not create stray current. It did not collect personal and private information. It did not come with a license to sell data collected. It was and is inexpensive to buy and typically lasts 40 years. It did not cause cancer.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, they had in mind an analog meter with the foregoing qualities.

 

The so-called advanced meter which Seattle City Light has installed on our property does not includes a path to ground. It has a puny surge protection. It cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore it catches fire. It creates stray current. It can be hacked. It collects information on our every electrical activity and reports this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. It presumes the existence of a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. It costs more than an analog meter and will last only five to seven years.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which we or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The anticipation of the installation of said meter has caused us great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit us with, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Given that the long term effect of excessive and continuous microwave radiation is carcinogenic, the actual installation of said meters is gradually causing us physical harm and is therefore a battery.

 

Since the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation constitutes a trespass and a taking of our property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of the so-called smart meter upon our property is a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, one must pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month must be paid in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

[If you are electrosensitive and can perceive the harm from your advanced meter, detail your perceptions. If you perceived the harm before the meter was installed, mention that. If you notice the effect more when you are near the meter than when you are out of your home, mention that. If you have spent money insulating your living space against radiation, mention that and include dollar amounts.]

 

We would like to ask that that this court order the removal of the so-called advanced meter which has been installed on our property and that our old analog meter or another analog meter be installed. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

∞∞∞∞

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

 

 

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings who have not yet had their GE digital non-communicating meter replaced with an advanced meter

 

At some time during or after the year 2000, Seattle City Light replaced our analog electric meter with a GE Digital non-communicating meter.

 

Seattle City Light has warned us that it intends to replace our GE digital non-communicating electric meter with an electronic digital meter known as an advanced meter. 

 

Our analog electric meter contained a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. It could not be hacked. It was all-metal and could not catch fire. It consumed only a minute amount of electricity to operate. It directly and accurately measured total watt-hours used. It did not create stray current. It did not collect personal and private information. It did not come with a license to sell data collected. It was and is inexpensive to buy and typically lasts 40 years. It did not cause cancer.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, they had in mind an analog meter with the foregoing qualities.

 

The so-called advanced meter which Seattle City Light has installed on our property does not includes a path to ground. It has a puny surge protection. It cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore it catches fire. It creates stray current. It can be hacked. It collects information on our every electrical activity and reports this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. It presumes the existence of a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. It costs more than an analog meter and will last only five to seven years.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which we or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The anticipation of the installation of said meter has caused us great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit us with, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Given that the long term effect of excessive and continuous microwave radiation is carcinogenic, the actual installation of said meters is gradually causing us physical harm and is therefore a battery.

 

Since the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation constitutes a trespass and a taking of our property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of the so-called smart meter upon our property is a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four-unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, one must pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month must be paid in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

 

Our GE digital non-communicating meter was not quite as bad as the new so-called communicating advanced meter, but it was inferior in most ways to the analog meters we once had. The new advanced communicating meter is much worse than both previous meters.

 

[If you are electrosensitive and can perceive the harm from your advanced meter, detail your perceptions. If you perceived the harm before the meter was installed, mention that. If you notice the effect more when you are near the meter than when you are out of your home, mention that. If you have spent money insulating your living space against radiation, mention that and include dollar amounts.]

 

We would like to ask that that this court order the removal of the so-called advanced meter which has been installed on our property and that our old analog meter or another analog meter be installed. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

 

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

For those living in single family homes or in one to four unit buildings whose GE digital non-communicating meters have already been replaced with an advanced meter

 

At some time during or after the year 2000, Seattle City Light replaced our analog electric meter with a GE Digital non-communicating meter.

 

Seattle City Light plans to replace our GE digital non-communicating electric meter with an electronic digital meter known as an advanced meter. 

 

Our analog electric meter contained a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. It could not be hacked. It was all-metal and could not catch fire. It consumed only a minute amount of electricity to operate. It directly and accurately measured total watt-hours used. It did not create stray current. It did not collect personal and private information. It did not come with a license to sell data collected. It was and is inexpensive to buy and typically lasts 40 years. It did not cause cancer.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, they had in mind an analog meter with the foregoing qualities.

 

The so-called advanced meter which Seattle City Light has installed on our property does not includes a path to ground. It has a puny surge protection. It cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore it catches fire. It creates stray current. It can be hacked. It collects information on our every electrical activity and reports this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. It presumes the existence of a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. It costs more than an analog meter and will last only five to seven years.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

When we or our predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which we or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The anticipation of the installation of said meter has caused us great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit us with, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Given that the long term effect of excessive and continuous microwave radiation is carcinogenic, the actual installation of said meters is gradually causing us physical harm and is therefore a battery.

 

Since the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation constitutes a trespass and a taking of our property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of the so-called smart meter upon our property is a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four-unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, one must pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month must be paid in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

 

Our GE digital non-communicating meter was not quite as bad as the new so-called communicating advanced meter, but it was inferior in most ways to the analog meters we once had. The new advanced communicating meter is much worse than both of our previous meters.

 

[If you are electrosensitive and can perceive the harm from your advanced meter, detail your perceptions. If you perceived the harm before the meter was installed, mention that. If you notice the effect more when you are near the meter than when you are out of your home, mention that. If you have spent money insulating your living space against radiation, mention that and include dollar amounts.]

 

We would like to ask that that this court order the removal of the so-called advanced meter which has been installed on our property and that our old analog meter or another analog meter be installed. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

 

 

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT
 

For customers who live in apartments with more than four units, who cannot opt out, and whose analog meters have not yet been replaced with advanced meters

 

Seattle City Light is planning to replace the analog electric meters in our building with electronic digital meters known as an advanced meters. 

 

Our analog electric meters contained a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. They cannot be hacked. They are all-metal and cannot catch fire. They consume only a minute amount of electricity to operate. They directly and accurately measure total watt-hours used. They do not create stray current. They do not collect personal and private information. They do not come with a license to sell data collected. They are inexpensive to buy and typically last 40 years. They do not cause cancer and make people sick.

 

When the owner of our building or the owner’s predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, that person had in mind an analog meter with the qualities enumerated in the previous paragraph.

 

On the other hand, the so-called advanced meters which Seattle City Light plans to install on our property do not include a path to ground. They have puny surge protection. They cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore they catch fire. They create stray current. They can be hacked. They will collect information on our every electrical activity, and they will report this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. The so-called advanced meters presume that the utility has received a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. They cost more than analog meters and will last only five to seven years.

 

The owner of our building or the owner’s predecessors in ownership did not have in mind an easement to which would authorize placement on this property of a meter with the many defects of the so-called advanced meters.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

We hold a leasehold interest in our apartment. Our leasehold interest is encumbered by the utility easement, just as our landlord’s fee interest is encumbered. Therefore, we have the same right as has our landlord to object that the scope of the easement that burdens our leasehold property interest will be exceeded by so-called advanced meters.

 

When our landlord or our landlord’s predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which our landlord or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The anticipation of the installation of advanced meters is causing us great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit us, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Given that the long term effect of excessive and continuous microwave radiation is carcinogenic, the actual installation of said meters will gradually cause us physical harm and is therefore a battery.

 

Since so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation constitutes a trespass and a taking of our leasehold interest in this property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of the so-called smart meter upon our leasehold interest in this property is a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, we would have to pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, we would have to pay a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

 

[If you are already electrosensitive and can perceive harm from advanced meters, detail your perceptions. If you perceived harm previously, mention that. If you notice the effect more when you are near the meter than when you are away from it, mention that. If you have spent money in the past to insulate your living space against radiation, mention that and include dollar amounts.]

 

I would like to ask that that this court order that Seattle City Light not install so-called advanced meters on our apartment building and that our current analog meter be allowed to remain. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

l

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

 

 

 

 

∞∞∞∞

 

ADDENDUM A

TO SMALL CLAIMS SUIT

For customers who live in apartments with more than four units, who cannot opt out, and whose analog meters have already been replaced with advanced meters:

 

Seattle City Light has replaced our analog electric meters in our building with an electronic digital meter known as an advanced meter. 

 

Our analog electric meter contained a built-in path to ground, built-in robust spark-gap surge protection. It could not be hacked. It was all-metal and could not catch fire. It consumed only a minute amount of electricity to operate. It directly and accurately measured total watt-hours used. It did not create stray current. It did not collect personal and private information. It did not come with a license to sell data collected. It was and is inexpensive to buy and typically lasts 40 years. It did not cause cancer.

 

When the owner of our building or the owner’s predecessors in ownership granted an easement to Seattle City Light to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, they had in mind an analog meter with the qualities enumerated in the previous paragraph.

 

On the other hand, the so-called advanced meter which Seattle City Light has installed on our property does not includes a path to ground. It has a puny surge protection. It cannot handle surges which the analog meter can handle, and therefore it catches fire. It creates stray current. It can be hacked. It collects information on our every electrical activity and reports this information to headquarters. There are no restrictions on the sale of information collected. It presumes the existence of a license to sell the information collected, and many utility companies are selling data. It costs more than an analog meter and will last only five to seven years.

 

The owner of our building or the owner’s predecessors in ownership did not have in mind an easement to which would authorize placement on this property of a meter with the many defects of the so-called advanced meters.

 

The National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program issued the following findings in 2016, as summarized by the Environmental Health Trust:

The study found adverse effects after long term exposure to cell phone radiation:

  • Increased incidences of glioma (a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancer) as well as schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heart were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in males.
  • Increased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells (nerve sheath) in the heart of both sexes of rats, while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.
  • DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (mixed results in tissues and brain regions).
  • Results from this study clearly show that biological impacts occur at non-thermal exposures like those that take place from cell phones today.

Every criticism of cell phones applies equally to broadcasting electronic meters because they all operate at the same frequency.

 

Many people are sickened by the extra and constant electromagnetic radiation emitted constantly day and night. Although most do not perceive the radiation, we are all slowly being harmed by it.

 

We hold a leasehold interest in our apartment. Our leasehold interest is encumbered by the utility easement, just as our landlord’s fee interest is encumbered. Therefore, I have the same right as our landlord has to object that the scope of the easement that burdens our leasehold property interest is being exceeded.

 

When our landlord or our landlord’s predecessors in ownership granted to Seattle City Light an easement to install, maintain, service, read, and replace electric meters, people were afraid of electricity. Because of the primitive nature of electrical delivery in early days of electrification, people expected a very safe meter, in short, a superior meter. Their grant of easement was not for installation of an inferior meter which would be unsafe and defective in so many ways. 

 

For all these reasons, the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement which our landlord or our predecessors gave to Seattle City Light.

 

According to the Washington courts, a grant of easement is not a blanket authorization to do just anything upon the easement. The general rule regarding limitations on the extent of easements is:

 

A servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on a right of way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use. (Green v. Lupo, 32 Wn. App. 318, 647 P.2d 51 (1982).

 

Likewise,  

 

We believe the servient owner is entitled to impose reasonable restraints on the right-of-way to avoid a greater burden on the servient owner’s estate than that originally contemplated in the easement grant, so long as such restraints do not unreasonably interfere with the dominant owner’s use”…. Rupert v. Gunter, 31 Wn. App. 27, 640 P.2d 36 (1982)”.

 

The anticipation of the installation of said meter has caused me great anxiety, and like a person raising a hammer to hit me with, the threat of coming installation constitutes an assault.

 

Given that the long term effect of excessive and continuous microwave radiation is carcinogenic, the actual installation of said meters is gradually causing me physical harm and is therefore a battery.

 

Since the so-called advanced meters exceed the scope of the easement granted, such installation constitutes a trespass and a taking of our property.

 

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution says

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …”,

 

The 7th Section of the Washington States Constitution says:

 

“No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law”.

 

Installation of the so-called smart meter upon our leasehold interest in this property is a violation of our rights to privacy under these constitutional provisions.

 

Installation will raise our insurance rates.

 

Seattle City Light has offered to allow some of us to opt out, but denied the possibility of others to opt out. Owners of single family homes and up to fourplex buildings may opt out. Individual condominium owners may out. However, renters of one to four unit buildings can opt out only if the landlord consents. Renters in buildings of over four units cannot opt out even if the owner wants to opt out. Because poor people are more likely to live in larger apartment complexes, these opt-out fees are discriminatory against poor people and against people of color. Buildings with solar panels and which are net metered are not allowed to opt out. Owners of non-residential buildings such as businesses, commercial buildings, schools, churches cannot opt out. These opt-out rules are unreasonable and discriminatory.

 

In order to opt out, one must pay a one-time opt out fee of $124.43 per unit opting out. There is absolutely no initial cost when an analog meter is left in place. In addition, a continuing opt out fee of $15.37 per month must be paid in order to retain opt-out status. The cost to read a meter is much less than $15.37 per meter per month. These fees bear no relation to the actual cost of the opt out and so constitute a violation of the Consumer Protection Act and discriminate against the poor and people of color.

 

[If you are electrosensitive and can perceive the harm from your advanced meter, detail your perceptions. If you perceived the harm before the meter was installed, mention that. If you notice the effect more when you are near the meter than when you are out of your home, mention that. If you have spent money insulating your living space against radiation, mention that and include dollar amounts.]

 

I would like to ask that that this court order the removal of the so-called advanced meter which has been installed on our property and that our old analog meter or another analog meter be installed. However, this court only awards money damages.

 

Therefore, we request damages of $5,000, which is the maximum amount we can claim in this court.

 

The offer made by Seattle City Light to replace our existing analog meters with so-called advanced meters is an offer under the Uniform Commercial Code of Washington. We reject this offer. If Seattle City Light has already replaced or at sometime in the future replaces our analog meters with a so-called advanced meter, it will do so or has done so, such placement is void under the doctrine of lawful offer and acceptance under the UCC. This is because an offer which is not rejected may be considered accepted. We do not accept. If an advanced meter will be placed on our building or has already been placed, we demand its replacement with analog meters.

 

_____________________    _____________________

Kim Smith      Kelley Smith

 

∞∞∞∞

 

 

Sincerely,

James Robert Deal , Attorney & Broker
James@JamesDeal.com
PO Box 2276 Lynnwood WA 98036
Direct Telephone Line: 425-771-1110
Toll-Free Line: 888-999-2022
Fax: 425-776-8081
AgencyOne Realty LLC
www.WashingtonAttorneyBroker.com
www.Mortgage-Modification-Attorney.com
www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com/Safewater
www.JamesRobertDeal.org/Smart-Meters
www.JamesRobertDeal.org/Attorneys-Viewpoint-Vaccinations
www.JamesRobertDeal.org/Door-To-Door-Transit
www.WhatToServeAGoddess.com/Music-By-Jimmie-Deal

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Share This