Frivolous ADA Lawsuits

[BullGoose]

This past Wednesday (4/12/23) I was served with a civil lawsuit seeking $25,000 in damages due to my website supposedly not being ADA Compliant. The current version of my website was launched only six months ago and the developers emphasized that it would meet all ADA requirements so my spidey senses started tingling immediately.

I'm fortunate to have a private investigator as a good friend as well as a few lawyer friends. In digging into this, we discovered that the plaintiff is a serial litigator who has 188 ADA lawsuits. It seemed odd that he was filing all of these lawsuits Pro-se (without a lawyer) so we dug a little deeper. The plaintiff is tied to a dis-barred lawyer (he embezzled client funds) who is acting as the puppet master. This dis-barred lawyer has a handful of disabled clients that he uses to file all of these lawsuits. The lawsuits are cookie cutter lawsuits and all are aimed at websites and not physical locations. They seek $25,000 in damages with a settlement of $4,000. For this client alone (and there are several other clients) the total settlement amount for the 188 cases would be $752,000.

What's perhaps even more interesting is this particular plaintiff seems especially interested in shaving websites, barbershop websites and cigar shop websites that are based in Los Angeles County. The day after I was served, the Shaver Shop down the street from me was also served. Although they do have a physical store, the suit filed against them was also for their website and not the physical store.

I have hired a specialty law firm and intend to fight this rather than settle. Someone needs to draw a line in the sand.

 

[Rocket 1]

Thanks for taking a stand on this!

 

[APBinNCA]

I think CA has laws to protect people from this. You should be able to get your legal costs back when they don't show up in court, well a judgement for them anyway. I hope this costs you no more than the settlement cost, it could cause them to rethink their operation. But if they choose to lower it, that might actually expand their operation so hopefully the State Prosecutor gets on them.

 

[rbscebu]

What is ADA?

 

[BullGoose]

Thanks for taking a stand on this!

The law firm that I hired has several clients who are being sued by this guy. We intend to put an end to it.

 

[BullGoose]

What is ADA?

Americans with Disabilities Act.

 

[BullGoose]

I think CA has laws to protect people from this. You should be able to get your legal costs back when they don't show up in court, well a judgement for them anyway. I hope this costs you no more than the settlement cost, it could cause them to rethink their operation. But if they choose to lower it, that might actually expand their operation so hopefully the State Prosecutor gets on them.

I hope CA has laws to protect businesses from this. I thought it would be covered by my business insurance but, it is not. Funny thing...when I reported this to my insurance agent he said they were sued for an ADA violation earlier this year (different plaintiff). Its a wide spread problem.

 

[timetofly]

I would imagine if your website developer said that your website is ADA compliant, and you have that in the contract, you are safe. If it is not fully ADA compliant, I would think that would fall on your developer. As Aaron, mentioned, he believes there are CA laws in place for merchant protection.

Good luck!

 

[Lockback]

This past Wednesday (4/12/23) I was served with a civil lawsuit seeking $25,000 in damages due to my website supposedly not being ADA Compliant. The current version of my website was launched only six months ago and the developers emphasized that it would meet all ADA requirements so my spidey senses started tingling immediately.

I'm fortunate to have a private investigator as a good friend as well as a few lawyer friends. In digging into this, we discovered that the plaintiff is a serial litigator who has 188 ADA lawsuits. It seemed odd that he was filing all of these lawsuits Pro-se (without a lawyer) so we dug a little deeper. The plaintiff is tied to a dis-barred lawyer (he embezzled client funds) who is acting as the puppet master. This dis-barred lawyer has a handful of disabled clients that he uses to file all of these lawsuits. The lawsuits are cookie cutter lawsuits and all are aimed at websites and not physical locations. They seek $25,000 in damages with a settlement of $4,000. For this client alone (and there are several other clients) the total settlement amount for the 188 cases would be $752,000.

What's perhaps even more interesting is this particular plaintiff seems especially interested in shaving websites, barbershop websites and cigar shop websites that are based in Los Angeles County. The day after I was served, the Shaver Shop down the street from me was also served. Although they do have a physical store, the suit filed against them was also for their website and not the physical store.

I have hired a specialty law firm and intend to fight this rather than settle. Someone needs to draw a line in the sand.

Best of luck and I'm sorry you have to deal with this but I'm glad you're challenging this *$&%).
People like this anger me greatly. They're scavengers, human buzzards who destroy people financially.
I hope you smoke this clown.

 

[DesertIguana]

We is Arizona had a guy who was shaking down business owner over Handicapped Parking Space & Handicapped Space Signage be complete with regulations.

Judge finally decided to throw out all these bogus suits.

 

[BullGoose]

I would imagine if your website developer said that your website is ADA compliant, and you have that in the contract, you are safe. If it is not fully ADA compliant, I would think that would fall on your developer. As Aaron, mentioned, he believes there are CA laws in place for merchant protection.

Good luck!

That would be great. I emailed the developers on Wednesday afternoon after I received the summons. So far, its been nothing but crickets. It gets further complicated because the case is filed in California state court but the website developers are based in Illinois. I'll be following up with them on Monday.

 

[rbscebu]

@BullGoose, I have just examined your website. It is obvious that it is not ADA compliant. You should have had a special section for disabled shavers .

 

[Whiterook]

Heck I didn't know websites had to be ADA compliant, let alone getting sued for it! That is pretty scarey.

 

[BullGoose]

Heck I didn't know websites had to be ADA compliant, let alone getting sued for it! That is pretty scarey.

Its definitely scarey. Its virtually impossible to make sure the site is 100% ADA compliant unless its a static site. If you look hard enough, you can find violations in most sites. For instance, does all the video have closed caption? Do all of the pictures have alt tags that can then be read by screen readers? Will the color combinations possibly cause an epileptic seizure? Etc etc

 

[TinkersDam]

I do not understand the concept of a website being ADA non-compliant. To me, this is like saying a book or a television program is not ADA accessible.
I am legally blind (almost totally blind), and feel it is my own responsibility to obtain and install whatever software or devices are needed to interact on the web. I currently use a screen magnifier, color inverter, and sometimes a screen reader. These and many other assistive technologies (including voice controlled) are available for free and are included as downloads or plug-ins for most modern operating systems and web browsers. This should not be the responsibility of the web-site owner, webmaster or designer.

BTW, I have no problems accessing or interacting with your site.

 

[Roman Totale XVII]

I worked for a big consumer goods company when these clowns started going after people some years ago. We were big enough to tell them to go pound sand, but the way they prey on small to medium-sized businesses is disgraceful.

 

[BullGoose]

I do not understand the concept of a website being ADA non-compliant. To me, this is like saying a book or a television program is not ADA accessible.
I am legally blind (almost totally blind), and feel it is my own responsibility to obtain and install whatever software or devices are needed to interact on the web. I currently use a screen magnifier, color inverter, and sometimes a screen reader. These and many other assistive technologies (including voice controlled) are available for free and are included as downloads or plug-ins for most modern operating systems and web browsers. This should not be the responsibility of the web-site owner, webmaster or designer.

BTW, I have no problems accessing or interacting with your site.

It seems as if its a fairly new concept and regulation. I do not remember any previous developers even mentioning ADA compliance for the website. It is very difficult, time consuming and expensive to retro-fit the website. Apparently these ADA lawsuits related to websites have become so common that there are specialty law firms that deal with them.

 

[timetofly]

Interesting read..

What You Should Do If You Face An ADA Website Lawsuit

Learn about ADA website lawsuits with 5 Ways to reduce your risk and how to avoid a web accessibility lawsuit. ADA Site Compliance will help!

adasitecompliance.com

 

[Hair Scraper]

I wonder whether the “plaintiff” truly has a disability that would prevent them from using websites?

There were cases in Colorado where a lawyer had a pool of “plaintiffs” to extort money from restaurants. It was discovered that one particular plaintiff had never been to the restaurant “they” were suing. They had a different disability and unbeknownst to them the lawyer filed suits on their behalf. The “plaintiff” was only being paid a measly fee while the lawyer took the money and ran.

 

[timetofly]

The “plaintiff” was only being paid a measly fee while the lawyer took the money and ran.

Precisely how a CAS works!