BP Pays $102M to Settle California Overcharging Lawsuit
“BP thought it could get away with providing false and misleading information in order to line its own pockets. Today, we send a clear message: cheating the people of California will cost you more than it's worth," Attorney General Xavier Becerra said.
January 11, 2018 at 05:03 PM
4 minute read
Xavier Becerra, attorney general of California. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced Thursday that BP Energy Co. and affiliates will pay $102 million over allegations that the company intentionally overcharged the state of California for natural gas.
“BP thought it could get away with providing false and misleading information in order to line its own pockets. Today, we send a clear message: cheating the people of California will cost you more than it's worth,” Becerra said in a news release. “My office is committed to holding accountable those who unscrupulously put profits ahead of people.”
BP provided the following statement in response:
“BP is the largest marketer of natural gas in North America, reliably and safely supplying energy to thousands of customers, including for many years California. As BP has stated consistently, the state's allegations were entirely without merit. BP strongly believes it honestly and fairly met its obligations under its contracts with the state. The state's Department of General Services confirmed its agreement to the terms of each transaction, and the state never attempted to exercise its right to seek price quotes from alternative suppliers as a result of any price provided by BP. But given the cost of protracted litigation and the unpredictability of outcomes at trial, BP has agreed to this compromise settlement for an amount well below what the state demanded in its complaint. We believe resolving this dispute in this manner is in the best interest of BP and its shareholders.”
The case involves natural gas the state purchased under three successive contracts from March 2003 to August 2012. The contracts allowed the California Department of General Services, which buys natural gas for numerous state agencies and political subdivisions, to cap the price it would pay BP for specific volumes of gas. Becerra alleged that BP regularly quoted and charged the state of California prices that violated this cap and concealed its overpricing by providing false and misleading information. These acts constitute violations of the California False Claims Act, Becerra said.
A former BP employee, Christopher Schroen, filed the lawsuit on July 3, 2012, alleging the overcharges. According to the complaint, BP knowingly quoted and charged prices in excess of the contractual price cap. Upon receiving the complaint, the California Attorney General's Office investigated and concluded that BP was liable for overpricing, Becerra said. The attorney general intervened in the case and took primary responsibility for prosecuting the action.
Under the settlement, BP will be required to pay $102 million in damages, which will be shared by the state and local agencies that purchased gas under the contracts, the former employee whistleblower, and the Attorney General's Office, Becerra said.
The whistleblower was represented by Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy in Burlingame. Niall McCarthy served as lead attorney for Schroen.
“Fraud against the government is a growth industry,” McCarthy said in a news release from the firm Thursday. “Whistleblowers like Chris Schroen are vital to protecting taxpayers. Not only is BP paying over $100 million through this settlement, but with the conduct now stopped, taxpayers are saving millions of dollars more every year. While Trump is allowing oil companies to drill off the California coast, this oil company was stopped from drilling California's pocketbook.”
Another member of Schroen's legal team, Justin T. Berger at Cotchett Pitre, said, “The California False Claims Act was designed to foster successful private-public collaboration of just this type.”
Cotchett Pitre said attorneys at Steidley & Kelly of Houston served as co-counsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWho Got the Work: Morgan Lewis Set to Defend X Corp., Elon Musk in ERISA Suit
Why Uber's MDL Consolidation Fight at 9th Circuit May Be One to Watch
Choice-of-Law Stipulation Doesn't Salvage Unenforceable Contract, Second District Says
3 minute readMusic Streaming App Platform Musi Sues Apple on Breach-of-Contract Claims
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250