Posts Tagged ‘ADA Lawsuits’




ADA Lawsuits can be dropped if…

| Tuesday, May 10th, 2011 | No Comments »

Those of you who have been sued become very quickly familiar with the complex intertwine of laws that give rise to ADA Lawsuits, in particular ADA cases.

One quick way to try and buck an ADA lawsuit though, is argue that the plaintiff never visited your store.

This tactic has worked before (especially if the defendant can demonstrate that no barrier was encountered because the plaintiff never showed up!) An older case comes to my mind, centered around Home Depot, when the plaintiff provided a receipt that he visited Home Depot (but it turned out that wasn’t the right home depot).

Nonetheless, here’s an interesting article:

SELINSGROVE — The son of a Texas woman who sued several Valley businesses for noncompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act had dropped out of Bucknell University about a month before the lawsuit was filed.

Richard K. Greer was a student during the fall semester 2010, which ended Dec. 16, but was not a student in the spring semester that started in January, university spokesman Tom Evelyn confirmed Thursday.

Meanwhile, Greer’s mother, Leslie Greer, filed ADA lawsuits on Jan. 11 against BJ’s Steak & Rib House, Emma’s Food for Life and Bot’s Cafe Inc., all of Selinsgrove; Mom’s Dutch Kitchen, Danville; Fox’s Family restaurant, Pennsdale; Colonial Village Plaza, Shamokin Dam; and Basin Street Shopping Center, Williamsport.

Leslie Greer, who uses a wheelchair, alleged in her lawsuit that she patronized the businesses during a recent visit with her son, a Bucknell student, and believes they are in violation of the ADA.

But when several of those being sued informed Greer they learned her son was no longer a student, the lawsuits were dropped.

“The premise of suit was that she’d be in our establishment, that there was the possibility she could continue to patronize us during her son’s tenure at Bucknell,” said Rick Schuck, owner of Bot’s. “He transferred in December, and we were served in the middle of January.”

You can read more here: Lawsuits against small businesses dropped from The Daily Item and through Overlawyered.com

Another way is to have a surveillance video of your store of everyone who enters your store — assuming of course that you didn’t erase your tapes, or that they did in fact did enter your store.  A loophole with this approach is that if you don’t have accessible parking, it’s possible that the plaintiff would claim that they couldn’t enter your store because there wasn’t proper parking, or there was something wrong with the outside. Sometimes that’s not the case. We can help provide evidence to verify the plaintiff claims, something we do regularly.

But that’s a different issue. Of course, the best way to avoid attracting a serial litigant who sees your facility as being an “easy target” is to become 100% compliant, to have all the appearance of compliance.

Comment below and share your thoughts on this!

If you want more tips on accessibility you can go here: Accommodation Compliance Rules and Regulations. Or you can reach us at 866 982 3212 or email us at help@ytaccess.com.

Denial of Service leads to Lawsuit: Service Dog

| Monday, May 9th, 2011 | No Comments »

Here is a very interesting story about service animals and places of public accommodation:

Christy Gardner, who was a driven athlete at Edward Little High School in Auburn and at Long Island College in New York, found basic training at Fort Leonard Wood a breeze.

She cruised through military police training before being deployed to the demilitarized zone between North Korea and South Korea.

But she suffered a traumatic brain injury during police operations there, and even the most basic tasks became challenging, even dangerous. “My medical records said I was not allowed to bathe alone, in case I had a seizure,” said Gardner, 28.

With brain damage that makes her prone to terrible seizures, Gardner lays credits for her ability to live alone squarely at the four furry feet of her golden retriever, Moxie.

Moxie, a service dog, can sense her owner’s grand mal seizures 10 minutes before they hit, and warn her to sit on the ground so she doesn’t injure herself falling.

Moxie can pull blankets off Gardner so she doesn’t choke during a seizure in bed, and is trained to roll her on her side and dial 911 on a special, large-button cell phone. She even can open the door, run to a neighbor’s home and ring the doorbell for help in an emergency.

So Gardner was startled when she entered a Portland convenience store last summer to get Moxie some water and the owner ordered them to leave, then walked toward them, his hands outstretched, to herd them from the store.

Gardner was frightened, mostly for Moxie. “If something happened to her physically, I have to find a live-in nurse or I have to live in a (nursing) home,” Gardner said.

You can read more from The Portland Press Herald. I sourced it from this Twitter: Service Dog Registry of the United States.

EDIT:

An additional story:

An Aurora man has sued the International House of Pancakes, saying employees at the popular breakfast restaurant discriminated against him because he uses a service dog.

The suit, filed in Kane County Court, alleges that Ricky Lee Schopp went to the IHOP restaurant on Augusta Way in Aurora on June 30, 2009, with his mother and his service dog, Phato. Schopp is paralyzed from the waist down and uses a wheelchair. Phato, a Labrador retriever, helps with certain skills, like opening doors.

At first, Schopp, his mother and the dog were seated at a table by the IHOP hostess, the suit says. However, not long after they sat down, an IHOP employee demanded they move to a different section of the restaurant that had no other customers, forcing them to eat alone, the suit says. The employee said the reason for the changing tables was that Schopp had a dog with him.

After being informed that it was a service dog, the employee still insisted they move or leave the restaurant, the suit alleges. Schopp chose to leave the restaurant.

You can also read this additional story of a Man from Aurora suing an IHOP for the same denial of service From: the Beacon News.

Service Dog Registry is a volunteer registry for Service Animals. It is NOT required. For more information about Service Dogs you can turn to United States Service Dog Registry.

Any questions about accessibility in general, feel free to call 866 982 3212 and help@ytaccess.com.

Judgement Avoids Landslide of ADA Lawsuits

| Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 | No Comments »

Through Overlawyered.com comes this article from the California Civil Justice Blog.

Cities can worry a little bit less about unexpected litigation costs in their already-strained budgets after a federal court ruling at the end of March ended a 14-year dispute over street curbs and sidewalks in Riverside, CA. A Riverside man named John Lonberg, who uses a wheelchair, first sued the city in 1997 claiming its curbs were sloped too high and lacked dividers to allow disabled access. In the latest ruling, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner ruled Lonberg had failed to demonstrate that Riverside as a whole is inaccessible to the disabled. A ruling in favor of Lonberg could have meant millions of dollars in liability for mandatory modifications.

Riverside’s City Attorney, Greg Priamos, was quoted in the Daily Journal saying the suit was “about money, not accessibility…The only hangup to a settlement earlier in the case was the amount of attorney’s fees. I’m offended by that.”

The lead counsel for Riverside, Greg Hurley, added, “Had Lonberg prevailed, there would have been an avalanche of lawsuits, because no city in the U.S. is totally accessible.”

Read more on the details of the case in the Riverside Press-Enterprise and Daily Journal (subscription required). Note the millions Riverside has spent over the past ten years to resolve the vast majority of its handicapped access issues, and the $221,000 Lonberg received in 2007.

The basic takeaway here, is that Riverside saved by this last judgement. By needing to prove that an entire city is not accessible, cities may be saved from an “avalanche of lawsuits”.

Nonetheless, entities in charge of public right of way should be aware that the ADA applies to them as Federal Civil Rights Law — requiring them to update their sidewalks even if their sidewalks preexist the ADA [New Jersey Protection and Advocacy, Inc. v. Township of Riverside, 2006 WL 2226332 (D.N.J.))].

This issue will be compounded in the near future when the access board, which is quasi-Federal agency to determine accessibility standards, is working on a Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines. Once this becomes law, you can be sure there will be a ton of lawsuits to follow as these guidelines explicitly apply to municipalities.

And of course, it’s been proven over and over that businesses are liable since the ADA has requirements that businesses must follow. As the economy gets worse, more and more people will be tempted by this on-going series of ADA lawsuits… so the avalanche for more businesses to get sued is bound to rise even more.

So GET COMPLIANT, either from us or from someone else.

Contact us for questions at 866 982 3212 or email us at help@ytaccess.com.

Chipotle’s Attempt to Appeal ADA Lawsuit Fails

| Monday, April 18th, 2011 | 1 Comment »

Following an on-going Chipotle case as covered previously:

Chipotle Deprived Disabled of Food View [From San Francisco Chronicle: Chipotle and Disabled Rights Lawsuit]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court won’t stop a disabled man’s lawsuit against Chipotle Mexican Grill for having counters too high for a person in a wheelchair.

The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from the Denver-based chain.

Maurizio Antoninetti sued when he found that he could not see the Chipotle food preparers because of the height of the counters. A federal judge ruled against him, saying Antoninetti had sued dozens of other places for access violations and dropped the suit after received cash settlements.

The judge said Antoninetti was insincere about wanting to return and eat at Chipotle.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the judge’s ruling, saying Antoninetti’s litigation history cannot be used against him.

The case is Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. v. Maurizio Antoninetti, 10-1051.

[From Huffington Post: Supreme Court Permits Maurizio Antoninetti's Lawsuit Against Chipotle]

 

If you are aware of this past lawsuit back in 2006, and you’ve been to a new Chipotle you will notice that even some of the new ones are not built to the standards required by that lawsuit (of having a continuous lowered counter).

The lesson here is simply that a business’s responsibility to follow the law cannot be waived for external reasons.

 

I’m sure more information will come forth soon.

Comment below and share your thoughts on this!

If you want more tips on accessibility you can go here: Accommodation Compliance Rules and Regulations

DOJ Settles with Virginia Health System on ADA Compliance

| Thursday, March 31st, 2011 | No Comments »

This just in. The Virginal Health Care system has agreed to pay 25k to two individuals for their lack of assisted listening device compliance. Under the ADA all goods ands services need to be accessible. So if you offer a good or service, make sure it is available to everyone! The number of assisted listening devices is dependent on the size of the occupancy.

I have quoted the entire text below.

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department has reached a settlement with Inova Health System to ensure effective communication with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in the provision of medical services. The agreement, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act, resolves a complaint that Inova failed to provide sign language interpreters to an expectant mother and others who are deaf and need interpreters to communicate effectively with health care providers.

The department’s lawsuit, filed yesterday with a consent decree in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, alleged that Inova Health System violated the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services, including sign language interpreter services, to deaf individuals at Inova Fairfax Hospital. Because of the hospital’s failure to provide sign language interpreter services, deaf individuals were denied the benefit of effective communication with hospital staff, the opportunity to effectively participate in medical treatment decisions, and the full benefit of health care services provided by Inova Fairfax Hospital, according to the complaint.

“The ADA protects the right of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to be able to access medical services, and this settlement is the latest example of the Justice Department’s unwavering commitment to enforcing the ADA,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “This settlement also demonstrates Inova Health System’s commitment to provide effective communication to people who are deaf or hard of hearing.”

“This settlement shows that Inova and the government share the same goal – making sure that deaf and hard of hearing patients can communicate with their doctors, especially at critical moments in their medical care,” said Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The consent decree, which must be approved by the district court, requires Inova Health System to pay $95,000 to aggrieved individuals and a $25,000 civil penalty; provide training to hospital staff on the requirements of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act; and adopt specific policies and procedures to ensure that auxiliary aids and services are promptly provided to patients or companions who are deaf or hard of hearing. Inova Health System has also separately agreed to pay a total of $25,000 to two other aggrieved individuals.

The ADA and Rehabilitation Act prohibit discrimination against individuals with disabilities by hospitals. Among other things, the ADA requires doctors, hospitals and other health care providers to provide equal access to patients and companions who are deaf or hard of hearing. When medical services involve important, lengthy or complex oral communications with patients or companions, hospitals are generally required to provide qualified sign language interpreters and other auxiliary aids, free of charge, to individuals who are deaf, are hard of hearing or have speech disabilities. The appropriate auxiliary aid to be provided depends on a variety of factors, including the nature, length and importance of the communication; the communication skills and knowledge of the individual who is deaf or hard of hearing; and the individual’s stated need for a particular type of auxiliary aid.

Those interested in finding out more about this settlement or hospitals’ effective communication obligations under the ADA may call the Justice Department’s toll-free ADA information Line at 800-514-0301 or 800-514-0383 (TDD), or access its ADA website atwww.ada.gov . ADA complaints may be filed by email to ada.complaint@usdoj.gov .

Contact: Department of Justice Main Switchboard – 202-514-2000

You can find a link on this below: 7th Space

Thoughts? Questions? Concerns? help@ytaccess.com or 866 982 3212. Thanks!

Donner Lake Kitchen closed due to ADA Lawsuit

| Wednesday, March 30th, 2011 | No Comments »

Another restaurant closed, this time due to a legal battle with Scott Johnson.

You can catch the story here:

Donner Lake Kitchen, a popular family-owned restaurant in rural Truckee, Calif. is closing its doors following a legal battle with attorney Scott Johnson, who is said to have filed “countless” complaints of lack of handicap accessibility at California businesses. The owner estimates that $20,000-$60,000 in repairs and upgrades would have been needed to bring the dining establishment into ADA compliance.

From Sierra Sun via CJAC via Overlawyered.com.

Find out more about Scott Johnson. This was on Sacramento Channel 10 earlier this year on Feb.

A shame, but don’t let this happen to you. Find out about your ADA liabilities.

Question? Comments? Feedback? Comment below, or email me at help@ytaccess.com or call 866 982 3212.

3 Steps to follow after Receiving an ADA Compliance Letter

| Saturday, March 26th, 2011 | No Comments »

What do you do when you receive an ADA compliance letter? The general gist is pretty standard:

  • Here are some items that are out of compliance
  • These laws say you are in violation
  • Pay our firm money to settle or we will take you to court

This is a nightmare situation for a small business owner.  You never have the resources to fight this, nor the time to look deeply into it yourself.  You might have heard a few things about this on the news or from your friends.  But you’re not an expert. This situation is bound to give you endless nights tossing and turning, feelings of helplessness, anger and disbelief.  Unfortunately, because of your limited resources, as a small business, you are an easy target for litigants.  So what should you do?

First off, I must offer a disclaimer.

I am not an attorney.

I cannot give you legal advice.  For legal advice, contact an attorney (for attorney info see below at step 1).

The most I can offer here, is our experience dealing with our client’s situations.

This article is meant to help guide you so you can make the right decisions.

Instead of making costly decisions.

What do we see our clients do?

 

The Situation:

An ADA compliance notice should list areas of deficiency in your facility.  The exact details of the violations are always changing so these letters change too.  But in general they follow the three bullet points above.

In the past, such notices were a cookie-cutter list, some of which were invalid and would get thrown out in court. The few items that stuck would prompt you to settle because even if you fought it, those items are legitimate.  In the eyes of the law, really, the only eyes that do count, being in violation with the requirements of the law mean that you need to pay the settlement and then pay both their attorney and your attorney.

The specific tactics have changed as the laws have changed.  Rather than threatening you with a list, half of which could get thrown out, making them look bad, savvier attorneys may threaten you with one or two very simple but legitimate issues.  Then you’re 100% wrong, and you HAVE TO FIX IT AND PAY.

So before we get to the steps, let’s address two scenarios.  What’s the worst that could happen?

The worst that will come from not following these three steps properly is that you will have to fight and lose a lawsuit and then pay the settlement.

Being sued once, if you didn’t learn your lesson the first time, there’s a good chance you will get sued again.  In fact, you could get sued for the very same issue by someone else while you’re still dealing with your first lawsuit.

This has happened to at least one of our previous clients.  They didn’t just refuse our service after asking about what we do during the initial lawsuit.  (They felt that the lawsuit was unjustified because in their words: “We were sure we didn’t do anything wrong.”) They were so emotionally distraught that just talking about the issue caused them to vent at us as though we brought it on them. They didn’t just not hire us, they also refused to hire ANYONE. In fact they refused to DO ANYTHING, as though their stubbornness would make the situation go away. Unfortunately, it did not.

It took them two lawsuits which they both settled before they hired us.

In a different situation, a quasi-government entity had me do an ADA compliance study. The laws yielded them some results which we presented. For what ever reason, this entity decided that an alternate construction was the most cost effective solution, despite our best efforts to warn them that this “solution” broke other laws.

They then got sued by someone else for their brand new construction.

Don’t be stubborn. Compliance is compliance. If you don’t hire us at least follow these steps, get an attorney and then get an ADA expert to study your site.

The Absolute BEST thing you can do to avoid such a letter is to be compliant.  Since the savvier attorneys who litigate such causes have been sending out ADA experts to measure and document violations, your best bet is to become ADA compliant.  You can do this a variety of ways.  You could hire ADA consultants like ourselves, or you could try and do it yourself.  Both options are presented here:

ADA Consultation Guide: What we do and where you can go to learn

Baring that, if you do have such a letter, let me emphasize a few things.

There are three steps to take.

Only three.   Sounds simple enough?  READ ON!

 

Step 1. The most important thing is to answer the letter.

I cannot emphasize this enough.

If you ignore the letter, in 90 days you will probably be sued in court.  Do NOT throw away the letter. Throwing the letter away or ignoring it, or pretending you didn’t get it compounds the problem, so that not only did you violate the ADA (thereby committing under the Unruh Civil Rights Act, making your violations an act of discrimination) but you also don’t show good faith.  Intention does not matter.  Your recorded, documentable actions do matter.  They matter a great deal.  Ignorance is not an excuse, it’s nearly an admission that you did something wrong, by not being responsible and not doing what you should have done in the first place.

You must be a responsible.

Doing otherwise only weakens your position.

So how do you answer it?  You can write the letter yourself, or you can hire an ADA experienced attorney.  We would recommend the individuals mentioned here:

Frank Chen

Matthew Norris

Both of these attorneys are experienced with handling ADA cases.

Even if you write the letter yourself, we still recommend that you hire an ADA consultant.  An attorney by the very nature of their trade can only help you AFTER YOU ARE SUED.  To prevent being sued in the first place, you should become ADA compliant.

 

Step 2. Get an ADA Compliance Survey

This step seems like a no-brainer.  But you wouldn’t believe the number of people who email or call and insist that their store is compliant because we have wheelchair users come in all the time!

This claim is the equivalent to a business addressing a lawsuit from one of their employees by claiming that their business is compliant because the other employees did not also sue.  This isn’t a defensible position as people don’t have to sue if they don’t want to.  Rather than argue with this excuse, businesses must understand, like it or not, if you open a business, you must follow the letter of the law.

If anything, getting an ADA expert who look at your site to verify the claims is one possible way to get around the problem.  Remember, they are suing you, so the burden of proof is on their side.

You must get the facts.  ADA violations are very dependent on specific measurements.  After all it’s the specific measurements which have gotten tens of thousands of small businesses in trouble.

If this litigant is new to this field, they could have made some errors somewhere, such as claiming that van parking cannot be shared with other access aisles.  We’ve helped attorneys with this.  The intermix of California Building Code and ADA Access Guidelines with the different standards and continuing discussion is very confusing, even to some professionals.  Many websites contain faulty information, or outdated information as do many ADA guidebooks.  A plaintiff new to this field might try to sue you for something that you aren’t required to do.

So getting an expert to verify the claims and then having your attorney talk to their attorney is the best way to resolve this issue.

What kind of expert should you get?  The highest license available on ADA expertise (in fact the only one) is called CASp.  You can read about it here.

ADA Compliance: Why CASp?

The (inexpensive) Cost of ADA Compliance

At the point you should understand that step 2 by itself won’t solve the issue.  You MUST FIX THE VIOLATIONS.  No survey, not even a CASp inspection will solve ADA violations by itself.  You must actively address the issues.  Which brings us to Step 3.

 

Step 3. Remediate the ADA Violations

So now you have the ADA violations in hand.  What then?  When following up with clients, we always astounded to hear that they did nothing with our report.  Or they gave it to a contractor who took the report away and never returned.  Maybe I should stop being so surprised.

Ideally, this step should have occurred first.

Doing Step 3 before any notice is received will PREVENT LAWSUITS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Most lawsuits that happen ask for settlement money, looking for the simplest violations.  These are the most egregious because not repairing items that could be easily dealt with shows a lack of good faith.  In fact, such violations demonstrate negligence on the part of ignorant businesses.  The best thing to do then, is to remove that ignorance and do your best to comply with the law.

This doesn’t mean you have to fix everything.  Many of the items are of small expensive.

For instance, insulating pipes could cost as little as 30 dollars.  But buying the proper insulation and not addressing the hot water pipes even if you wrapped the drain, is a problem.  I’ve seen pipes wrapped in duct tape and packing foam.  Is that insulating?  After a while, these things get dirty, get torn off and look awful.  Is that really a solution in the long run?  (Incidentally, Here is a website that sells pipe insulation materials: Plumberex, ADA compliant Solutions.  We met them at a disabilities trade-show last year.)

But insulation as duct tape and foam… that’s something for the courts to decide.  Which may save you 30 dollars, perhaps, but it is grounds for a potential lawsuit.

But wait, why are you trying to save $30 when a lawsuit will cost you thousands?  Aren’t you complying to avoid a lawsuit in the first place?

Best to understand what the law is, and then exceed the letter of the law.

 

ADA Compliance Takeaway

So okay, the steps are short enough for a blog article.

But step 3 can take some time.  If you don’t have sole responsibility for your parking lot, you may have to talk with your property manager.  I cover those issues above in a link, but I’ll link it again: The (inexpensive) Cost of ADA Compliance

So compliance can take some time.  If you are sued, your number one priority should be to hire an attorney, or at least talk to a knowledgeable one.  We work with attorneys, give us a call we can introduce you to some experienced attorneys.

But the urgency of being in a lawsuit situation aside,  obviously education is the way to understand your legal liability.  Step 3 is the only step that will prevent future lawsuits.

To tell you the truth, it’s often too late to do anything but settle after you are sued.  A violation is in fact a violation. Preventive measures can only happen before a lawsuit.

Obviously then, education is the key.

Compliance is the solution.

But as many small businesses have discovered, compliance requires special knowledge.  Doing your taxes isn’t that easy, and doing a business’s taxes requires quite a bit of commitment upfront and on-going.

So why not hire a good CPA?

It takes architects about 3 months to learn all about the ADA, the different laws and so on.  The problem isn’t the specific building code (although all those numbers can be confusing), it’s all the legality that surrounds it.  And of course, they also need real world experience.

For someone with no experience in this field, it will take them about 6 months before they become able to inspect properties on their own.  At least a year before they can begin to advise people on what to do.  So why wait a year and spend all that effort to save several hundred dollars? Why not hire a good and experienced ADA expert?

Best to get that exposure report right away.

 

Thoughts?  Questions?  Comment below for feedback, or for more immediate and confidential assistance, call 866 982 3212 or email us at help@ytaccess.com

ADA Lawsuits prompt a Grace Period Bill in Congress

| Friday, March 25th, 2011 | No Comments »

The majority of lawsuits arising from ADA violations are aimed at smaller businesses.  Many of those lawsuits hurt businesses as the steep cost of defending those lawsuits for violations (which most likely are, strictly speaking, in fact violations) prompt potentially large settlements.  These settlements are usually at least $4,000.00 + attorneys fees.

Well, now there’s a new bill aimed at helping those small businesses.  This bills hopes to deter serial litigants from threatening small businesses for items which are readily achievable.  Will this bill pass? It’s labled H.R. 881.

March 7, 2011 (San Diego’s East County) — Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon) recently introduced legislation aimed at curtailing what he views as frivolous lawsuits against small businesses that are allegedly in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The bill, entitled the ADA Notification Act, would provide businesses accused of an ADA violation with a 90-day grace period to make necessary modifications.

“It’s bad enough that small businesses are facing enormous challenges due to the current economic downturn,” Rep. Hunter said in a press release. “What they don’t need to contend with are any other unnecessary obstacles that impede growth and competitiveness. But that’s exactly what’s happening in San Diego with predatory ADA lawsuits.”

Our thoughts on this proposed legislation is that yes, businesses should become compliant, they should at least fix the items which are readily achievable (which is a classification of items relatively inexpensive to fix — and also the class of ADA violations which are in fact the most sued over) and yes, businesses should absolutely understand what laws effect their bottom line.

But rather than introducing more government oversight and legislation, the key to compliance should be EDUCATION not legislation.

Will this 90 day grace period prompt a business to fix the items in question properly?

Will a 90 day grace period be long enough for a business to find, qualify and hire a contractor to properly install items like grab bars, signage, restroom amenities and parking striping?

The area of law surrounding the ADA have multiple requirements. It’s possible that hiring any contractor will not only the business MORE LIABLE but also leave the contractor liable as well.

That would be a disastrous waste of resources and funds!

Yes, it’s as I’ve been writing all along. Education and then proper action towards ADA COMPLIANCE is the only way to avoid lawsuits.

If you have any questions about the particulars of YOUR ADA COMPLIANCE best email us at help@ytaccess.com or call 866 982 3212.

You can read more about this by clicking the link below.
Read from East County via Overlawyered.Com and CJAC.

ADA Compliance Options: Why CASp?

| Monday, March 14th, 2011 | 1 Comment »

For those of you who don’t know, CASp stands for Certified Access Specialist. The short version of this history is that the California Senate passed a bill, SB 1608, which altered the nature of ADA compliance requirements for businesses.  This was an ambitious bill, pushed forward mainly by the California Chamber of Commerce.  SB 1608 has far reaching effects.  This article discusses some of the benefits of SB 1608 weighed against some of the added liabilities for business owners.

If you want a more detailed history of SB 1608, you can go to the California Chamber of Commerce ADA Reform page.  We’ve extracted some of the key points from their website, as they are quite broad of this lobbying effort.

I assume that you’re a business owner.  If you aren’t, then you’re probably either an attorney, a contractor or an architect (or an activist).  Either way, you’re interested in how SB 1608 impacts businesses, places of public accommodation as defined under Title 3 of the ADA.

 

Let’s start with the liabilities.  Understanding the benefits are less meaningful if you don’t know the liabilities.

I assume you’re already familiar with the responsibilities of ADA Compliance at your place of business. Basically, your business must work towards becoming 100% ADA Compliant.  There are a few things to consider in the course of this, like what kind of ADA inspection do you want to get, or when you will fix certain items.  Otherwise, the liabilities listed here are what CASp adds to your responsibility.  It’s important to note that ADA inspections are only the first step towards ADA Compliance.  An inspection, not even a CASp inpsection by itself, does ANYTHING to subtract from your duties to comply with the law.  What a complete ADA inspection does, is demonstrate good faith effort.  Inspections also are useful for contractors and architects who are not generally well versed in ADA compliance.

 

Liabilities of CASp Inspections

CASp and SB 1608 was passed only to protect businesses interested in ADA Compliance.  There are two main considerations.

1. A CASp inspection requires that a timeline be implemented as to when items are to be made in compliance.  There are no standard guidelines for how to assess this — as such a timeline is largely dependent on the financial resources of the entity in question.  This means that any CASp inspector needs to work with the entity in determining an accurate guide as to when items should be fixed.

If the timeline is too strict, the entity may fall behind fixing these items and in the case of an ADA lawsuit, the entity will look faulty.

If the timeline is too lax, in the case of an ADA lawsuit, the entity could have fixed certain times and remained needlessly liable for that time.

Remember the point of CASp is to become ADA compliant.  If you get a CASp Report and then do nothing, you will become more liable over time.  If you display the CASp certification, considering no one else has one, you’ll probably deter ADA lawsuits for a time.  After a time, having the CASp certification with obvious ADA violations will get you sued.  Then you’ll look extremely worse in court for not complying at all.

2.  CASp can be quite expensive, because of the added liabilities to the CASp Inspector in determining the timeline.  The average cost of CASp is $2400.

3. This is not a liability, but it is worth mentioning:  CASp goes into effect only if the site is sued AFTER getting a CASp inspection.  No protection is offered retroactively.

4. A CASp licensed individual is required to be included in building departments.  The original time line stated that such an individual was to be included as of July in 2010, but this date has been moved into 2014.  CASp is meant to bridge State Building Code and ADA guidelines, as most contractors and architects are not well versed in Federal Civil Code.  While having a CASp individual does not offer a significant benefit, as local ordnances only have jurisdiction over State law, not Federal Civil Law.  A CASp individual in the local building department is a resource to local businesses but as a state employee such an individual is limited to advising about the State regulations.  If you want the benefits of CASp, you’d still have to hire them outside of their normal building department job and pay them the required amount.

 

Advantages of CASp

The California Chamber of Commerce has listed 10 benefits of SB 1608 for businesses.  We have divided these benefits into two groups, for those who get CASp and everyone else.  This is the first section.

1.  Part of the fear of ADA compliance is the cost.  CASp helps a business focus on what they can pay for.  Remember, the timeline is there to help businesses comply within a reasonable time frame.  If a CASp inspector understands approximately how much a business can afford for ADA compliance per month, the cost of compliance can be spread out over time to achieve 100% ADA Compliance.

2.  CASp certification is offered for all sites, even if they are not yet compliant.  This certification can be posted on a store window to deter litigants looking for an easy target.

3. CASp tries to help businesses avoid expensive lawsuits.  To this end, CASp allows businesses to request a 90 day stay.  This means that opposing attorney can’t rack up expensive attorney fees during discovery, while you decide what to do (accept their settlement or not).

 

Benefits of SB 1608

The effects of SB 1608 offer several included benefits for business owners whether they get CASp inspected or not.

1. Litigating attorneys who demand money must also include a statement advising the business what their rights are.  So if you haven’t got CASp, you won’t be able to request the 90 day stay.

2.  SB 1608 limits the amount of the damages to $4,000 per visit.  Furthermore these damages must be related to the plaintiff and explained how they injure the plaintiff.  For example, having detectable warnings helps protect those who are legally blind.  Someone in a wheelchair probably won’t be able to sue for a lack of them.  Grab bars would effect such a plaintiff, however, so they will be able to make a complaint about that.

3. A clause is included in SB 1608 to help lessen the attorney’s fees in a settlement.

4. CASp individuals are going to be more common, at least loosely tied to local building deparments (see item #4 under liabilities of CASp).

5. Architects and contractors will be required to learn about the ADA as part of their continuing education so they can be at least aware of what they don’t know.

6. A State Commission is formed to help interface the Disabled Rights and interests of Building Departments.

7. Cal Chambers also lists “new deadlines” for State building code compliance with ADA requirements.  The Division State Architect was already doing this with the Department of Justice.  It’s important though, to have a codified process as the building code is updated every three years.  The ADA is also updated but less frequently.

 

Consequences of CASp and SB 1608

CalChambers does recognize the need for some coordination between advocacy groups and the interests of the status quo, but as a business organization, they tend to lean towards the interests of big business.  Much of what SB 1608 does is to help entities that have cash take advantage of SB 1608′s lowering of the cost of lawsuits.  Smaller businesses that do not have funds must rely on pressuring larger property management firms to help with the cost of ADA compliance.

It’s also important to note that CASp cannot stop lawsuits, they can only help make the process more difficult for litigants. One of the long term consequences of CASp is that as businesses get CASp certification, those who do not have it, or cannot afford it will face a steeper battle as they become easier targets for litigation.

Add onto this that the Unruh Civil Rights Act defines violations of the ADA as acts of discrimination — this verbage has not changed.  Intention is unimportant to this ruling, as proven in so many court cases.  Businesses that do not comply with the ADA regardless of getting CASp or not still carry the steep fines associated with acts of discrimination — $4,000.

This heavy responsibility is to be sure, mostly on businesses right now.  CalChambers and other business groups are bound to spread this liability to other responsible parties, such as architects, contractors and Real Estate Agents.  So it’s important that all responsible parties with an interest in a place of public accommodation help make their site ADA compliant,

ADA Reform however, is not finished.  Much of SB 1608 mentions benefits to business — offering little or no compensation for the rights of the disabled.  You can be sure there will be an increased effort of disabled advocates to have their say as well.

 

All this should be considered in getting an CASp inspection.  For a more of a fiscal view of how to balance these responsibilities with ADA compliance take a look here:

How to put a price tag on your liability.

If you’ve decided that getting an ADA compliance report is for you, congratulations.  Our ADA Consulting Services.

If you have questions or concerns call us at 866 982 3212 extension 1!  Or email us at help@ytaccess.com.  Our advice is always free.

ADA Regulations: Service Animals Part 2

| Sunday, March 13th, 2011 | No Comments »

 

So, to follow up on the complex ADA regulations and interpretations of service animals

The New York Post has posted this article going a little overboard on what is or is not a service animal.  Nonetheless, it does present an interesting point of view.  If business owners were to take this article literally it could get them in trouble with ADA requirements as the scoping is too broad.

For the service goat, assistance monkey and emotional-support iguana, it could be the end of an era. Under new federal rules taking effect Tuesday, the Americans with Disabilities Act will no longer compel shops, restaurants and other businesses to accommodate a menagerie of supposed service animals brought in by the public. Only dogs and some miniature horses will qualify. Moreover, dogs will qualify as service animals only if they’ve been individually trained to assist with a disabled human’s needs.

“The provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this new definition.” And they’ll need to be on-leash unless their work requires otherwise.

Finally. You’d think the Obama administration had, in a fit of common sense, for once chosen to heed a public outcry about zany regulations-gone-mad.
But as usual, the politics are more complicated than that.

(Continue…)

Understandably, this is a complex and not well understood area of law. But this, like issues in HR and employee procedures, is something all businesses and institutions should be aware of.

If you want further information on the topic, you can go to these official ADA sites. Or you can look directly at what our services cost.

Have any questions? Call us at 866 982 3212 x2 or email us at help@ytaccess.com