There are lawyer groups who do this professionally, they have professional "victims" who they work with. They don't care at all if the business goes under and the argument for rebuilding is just rhetoric in the suit. Their entire goal is to manipulate a legal system that is designed in a matter where the cost to defend against the lawsuit is so massive that even though the law says that the business is "in the right" they can't afford their day in court. I have heard of some of these lawsuits where the details are not what you would think and there is no actual problem to any real disabled person. I saw one of these lawsuits where they knocked over a trash can deliberately in the bathroom so that they could claim that the sink was not set up to always be accessible and management was neglectful (they also stole the restroom maintenance log to make it harder to prove that the restrooms are checked, those forms are worth millions in California courtrooms). I have also seen lawsuits where they actually vandalized the bathroom, for example removing the protective pipe wraps that go under sinks to protect against one in a wheelchair being burned by a hot water hose. The manager found the pipe wraps thrown into a regular stall, found it strange and called a plumber to replace everything. Thankfully he had that paperwork because two days later they were served with a million dollar class action suit with pictures of the non compliant sinks but obviously no pictures of the intentional removal of the protective material. If he had fixed it himself it would have been his word versus the lawyers and they would have probably found against him. I had one of my stores served with a lawsuit claiming we didn't have correct handicapped parking signs. Funny thing was that Legal called me and I was at the store, I walked out front and the specific location they claimed was unmarked had a sign, and it had bird crap all over it too. I sent a picture to the lawyer immediately, bird crap and all to prove it had always been there, and they called the plaintiffs lawyers and told them that they had 24 hours to withdraw the suit or we would make an example of them for the court and furthermore would petition the State Bar to ban the lawyer.storewanderer wrote: ↑November 25th, 2023, 1:03 am I've heard these groups will target a business and they will not take no for an answer. They will demand the business rebuild so it is able to have proper access/spacing. Really they just want a settlement of some kind but they don't care if they bankrupt the business in the process. As long as they get their settlement payment first.
I agree it is the responsibility of the business to comply with the law "as soon as possible." If the structure makes it impossible to remodel (too old), economics do not allow for you to demolish/rebuild, then it is not "possible" anytime soon. So you provide service to make up for it as they did.
I don't think this business did anything wrong. Operating from an old outdated building isn't doing something wrong.
The law allows for many situations that are imperfect. For example, the A&W could have parking spaces on the curb side that are striped for handicapped parking. They might be that way already and as such only create a few extra feet if any for one to travel. Nobody is actually being victimized here. But technically they are supposed to be the absolute closest ones which can also be a matter of opinion (because of other factors such as type of vehicle the handicapped person uses, method of load/unload, one way could be further for one person and shorter for another!) and as such they sue hoping a settlement will be cheaper fully knowing the business is legally compliant. I've been lawsuits filed where the city water mains, sewer lines, or underground power forces the placement of the parking lot rows and such, and these guys will try to sue that a parking space that is three inches closer to the building should have been selected instead or the utilities should have been moved which is impossible. Now you have to get experts to testify over three inches? Nobody who is disabled is being damaged by a three inch difference in what is still a 50 foot transit to the store. There are actual engineering groups that certify compliance with ADA, you'll see their stickers and signs on many buildings now but these guys will still sue hoping the business will settle because it's cheaper than the legal process.
Once again, there is no actual victim here if the business made a reasonable attempt to comply, which they did. 99.99% of these suits by the traveling lawyer are businesses that they know are actually compliant and they sue anyway demanding perfection which is not what the law is about at all. The law should demand a "loser pays" system for these lawsuits, as well as a dramatic reduction in court fees which are completely unreasonable, which would shut down these shakedown operations instantly.
