On Sunday, The Baltimore Sun resumed hunting its favorite paper tiger — ground rent owners. In "Ground rent redux" (June 20) you again decried ground rent ejectments. Yet, ejectment is yesterday's news.

Despite the editorial's claim, our class action does not seek to revive ejectment, now three years extinct. Rather, we merely seek to protect property and contractual rights to collect ground rent.

Here, the editorial is again misinformed, saying "Owners still have the ability to collect their rents." If only this were true.

In reality, the "reform" made it financially impractical to collect rent by shifting the costs of pursuing unpaid rent. Actual costs can total thousands of dollars, yet the statute caps reimbursement, typically at $150. So ground lease owners should spend thousands of dollars to collect maybe a couple hundred in back rent? Would you?

The practical effect is that paying rent is now voluntary. Rent defaults have skyrocketed, and ground leases have lost substantial value, destroying formerly prudent investments by Marylanders of all kinds, including senior citizens, charities, schools and religious groups.

It's time to get the facts straight and stop singling out ground rent owners for harsh treatment under the law and on the editorial page. Ground rent owners only want what we are entitled to — and what you incorrectly say the "reform" leaves us with — the ability to collect our rent. While The Sun derides "the audacity of [our] claim," we're confident the courts will not.

Stanley Goldberg and Lawrence Polakoff, Baltimore

The writers are plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit by ground rent owners.