The City of Hartford has filed a federal lawsuit accusing major fire truck manufacturers and private equity firms of illegally consolidating the industry, inflating prices and delaying deliveries of critical emergency vehicles.
The complaint, filed April 10 in U.S. District Court in Connecticut, names more than a dozen defendants, including REV Group Inc., Oshkosh Corp. and private equity firm American Industrial Partners, along with several subsidiaries and affiliated companies.
The city alleges the companies engaged in a yearslong strategy of acquiring competitors and key suppliers in the fire apparatus market, reducing competition and creating a highly concentrated industry dominated by a small number of firms.
Hartford’s lawsuit follows similar antitrust cases filed by municipalities nationwide, including Los Angeles County.
Hartford officials claim that consolidation has allowed manufacturers to significantly raise prices, limit production and extend delivery timelines for fire trucks and related equipment.
According to the complaint, prices for fire apparatus have risen sharply in recent years, in some cases by 50% or more, while order backlogs have grown and delivery delays have stretched for months or longer.
Hartford says those conditions have forced municipalities to pay more for essential public safety equipment while waiting longer to receive it, straining local budgets and potentially affecting emergency response capabilities.
The lawsuit argues that the fire truck market was once made up of numerous independent manufacturers, which allowed cities to negotiate prices and choose among competing suppliers. That dynamic changed, Hartford alleges, as companies pursued a “roll-up” strategy — acquiring multiple businesses and integrating them under common ownership.
American Industrial Partners is accused of playing a central role in that consolidation by building REV Group through a series of acquisitions, including well-known fire apparatus brands.
The complaint also alleges that Oshkosh and its subsidiary Pierce Manufacturing further reduced competition through acquisitions and partnerships, including deals involving other fire apparatus builders.
Hartford contends the combined effect of those transactions has been to substantially lessen competition and move the industry toward monopoly conditions, in violation of federal and state antitrust laws.
The city is seeking monetary damages, which could be tripled under antitrust statutes, along with court orders to unwind certain acquisitions and block future anticompetitive conduct.
Hartford officials argue that such relief is necessary not only to compensate the city, but also to restore competition in a market that supplies equipment essential to public safety.
The defendants had not responded to the allegations in the complaint as of Thursday morning.
