mark handler
SAWHORSE
Cookie-cutter ADA complaints leave some business owners baffled
By Wendy Schultz
The Mountain Democrat Staff writer
http://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/cookie-cutter-ada-complaints-leave-some-business-owners-baffled/
March 14, 2012
In December, Placerville property owner John Mosbacher received a letter from Johnson suing Century 21 for non-compliance with ADA regulations. Mosbacher, who owns the Lower Main Street property where the Century 21 is located as well as the Whistle Stop Yogurt Shop and Placerville Coffee Depot next door said he was working under a building permit, making the modifications to the property for ADA compliance.
“We extended the city sidewalk and made it ADA accessible and put in the disabled parking space, but we hadn't striped it yet because we were still working under the permit and having to wait on the weather."
Johnson, according to Mosbacher, did not patronize any of the businesses, one of which wasn't yet open. "The contractor saw him across the street at KFC taking pictures."
In the federal lawsuit complaint sent to Mosbacher, Johnson claimed to have suffered embarrassment; treatment as a second class citizen, experiencing discomfort and difficulty and incurring minimal physical personal injury because he was not able to access Century 21 on two different occasions. Johnson also claimed two other occasions in which he had foregone visits and claimed damages for those non-visits as well to the tune of $4,000 for each occasion.
Salon Vera owner Tricia Hamerton received a letter of non-compliance from Johnson at the end of 2009. In February of this year, she received notice of a federal lawsuit being filed against her and the property owner. In the complaint, the day spa on the corner of Sacramento and Main streets in Placerville was targeted for non-compliance of ADA laws because the bathroom door closing speed did not accomodate him in his wheelchair with his service animal.
But, Hamerton, who widened the restroom door and made ADA compliant modifications when she moved into the building, thought she was compliant. Customers with wheelchairs and walkers had no difficulty in using the restroom and Hamerton’s permit had been signed off as meeting the California Building Code accessibility laws. In addition, Hamerton said that Johnson never used her restroom.
“He brought his dog in while I was doing my mom’s hair and bought a gift certificate for $35. He never left the desk area.”
The gift certificate was redeemed by a young woman who said she was a legal assistant. She was not disabled and did use the restroom, which is where Hamerton surmises the photographs of her restroom used as an exhibit in the complaint came from.
Johnson is claiming $4,000 in damages for each of two actual visits and two “deterred, foregone” visits — visits he claims he would have made but could not because of the compliance violation. Exactly the same number of visits and the same type as claimed for Mosbacher’s property.
When asked about how he could claim damages for a visit that never occurred, Johnson said that some attorneys claim the $4,000 California allows for each day of non-compliancy; he claims only the minimum amount of damages.
Johnson defends the cookie cutter aspect of his legal complaints by saying so many of his complaints are about the same non-compliant parking and restroom access; of course they are the same.
Hamerton plans to fight the case. Others who have done so have won against Johnson, but it’s an expensive fight — another reason businesses choose to settle out of court. One business owner fought his case in court for two years, but ended up settling after $50,000 in court costs, including a $27,000 payment to the plaintiff and his attorney. His business closed.
Johnson claims he only files a federal lawsuit if the business/property owners do not respond to his initial letter asking them to bring the property into federal and state disability requirements within 90 days or to provide him with a disabled access compliance report in 60 days. In one letter he did not identify what the non-compliance issues were or ask the business owner to respond to him, other than the disabled access compliance report which was stated as an alternative.
“If you’re disabled, California is the place to live,” said Johnson. “The access laws are far ahead of other states and always have been.”
He says that a lot of people don’t like him and that he has received death threats by phone and email. He likens ADA violations to the same experiences ethnic minorities faced in receiving equality of services. “What keeps me going are things like the letter I received from the father of a soldier who’d been wounded in Afghanistan,” said Johnson. “He wrote, ‘Now I understand. Thank you.’”
Kerry Richman worries that Johnson’s tactics do more harm to the disabled than actual good. “He’s doing it to line his pocket, not educate the public. It can prejudice businesses against the disabled community and it hurts the disabled more if a business closes than if it doesn’t have a ramp. What happened to my right to have a latte when Pony Expresso closed?”
In 2010, federal ADA regulations were revised to bring recreation facilities into compliance. Public swimming pools, sports centers, fitness centers must now have ADA accessible lockers and locks, exercise equipment and stadium seating as well as van parking and accessible entrances. There are updated guidelines for hospital rooms — and compliance must be met by March 15. Any ADA compliance issues not yet resolved will be subject to the 2010, not the 1990 standards. Johnson will have fresh meat.
By Wendy Schultz
The Mountain Democrat Staff writer
http://www.mtdemocrat.com/news/cookie-cutter-ada-complaints-leave-some-business-owners-baffled/
March 14, 2012
In December, Placerville property owner John Mosbacher received a letter from Johnson suing Century 21 for non-compliance with ADA regulations. Mosbacher, who owns the Lower Main Street property where the Century 21 is located as well as the Whistle Stop Yogurt Shop and Placerville Coffee Depot next door said he was working under a building permit, making the modifications to the property for ADA compliance.
“We extended the city sidewalk and made it ADA accessible and put in the disabled parking space, but we hadn't striped it yet because we were still working under the permit and having to wait on the weather."
Johnson, according to Mosbacher, did not patronize any of the businesses, one of which wasn't yet open. "The contractor saw him across the street at KFC taking pictures."
In the federal lawsuit complaint sent to Mosbacher, Johnson claimed to have suffered embarrassment; treatment as a second class citizen, experiencing discomfort and difficulty and incurring minimal physical personal injury because he was not able to access Century 21 on two different occasions. Johnson also claimed two other occasions in which he had foregone visits and claimed damages for those non-visits as well to the tune of $4,000 for each occasion.
Salon Vera owner Tricia Hamerton received a letter of non-compliance from Johnson at the end of 2009. In February of this year, she received notice of a federal lawsuit being filed against her and the property owner. In the complaint, the day spa on the corner of Sacramento and Main streets in Placerville was targeted for non-compliance of ADA laws because the bathroom door closing speed did not accomodate him in his wheelchair with his service animal.
But, Hamerton, who widened the restroom door and made ADA compliant modifications when she moved into the building, thought she was compliant. Customers with wheelchairs and walkers had no difficulty in using the restroom and Hamerton’s permit had been signed off as meeting the California Building Code accessibility laws. In addition, Hamerton said that Johnson never used her restroom.
“He brought his dog in while I was doing my mom’s hair and bought a gift certificate for $35. He never left the desk area.”
The gift certificate was redeemed by a young woman who said she was a legal assistant. She was not disabled and did use the restroom, which is where Hamerton surmises the photographs of her restroom used as an exhibit in the complaint came from.
Johnson is claiming $4,000 in damages for each of two actual visits and two “deterred, foregone” visits — visits he claims he would have made but could not because of the compliance violation. Exactly the same number of visits and the same type as claimed for Mosbacher’s property.
When asked about how he could claim damages for a visit that never occurred, Johnson said that some attorneys claim the $4,000 California allows for each day of non-compliancy; he claims only the minimum amount of damages.
Johnson defends the cookie cutter aspect of his legal complaints by saying so many of his complaints are about the same non-compliant parking and restroom access; of course they are the same.
Hamerton plans to fight the case. Others who have done so have won against Johnson, but it’s an expensive fight — another reason businesses choose to settle out of court. One business owner fought his case in court for two years, but ended up settling after $50,000 in court costs, including a $27,000 payment to the plaintiff and his attorney. His business closed.
Johnson claims he only files a federal lawsuit if the business/property owners do not respond to his initial letter asking them to bring the property into federal and state disability requirements within 90 days or to provide him with a disabled access compliance report in 60 days. In one letter he did not identify what the non-compliance issues were or ask the business owner to respond to him, other than the disabled access compliance report which was stated as an alternative.
“If you’re disabled, California is the place to live,” said Johnson. “The access laws are far ahead of other states and always have been.”
He says that a lot of people don’t like him and that he has received death threats by phone and email. He likens ADA violations to the same experiences ethnic minorities faced in receiving equality of services. “What keeps me going are things like the letter I received from the father of a soldier who’d been wounded in Afghanistan,” said Johnson. “He wrote, ‘Now I understand. Thank you.’”
Kerry Richman worries that Johnson’s tactics do more harm to the disabled than actual good. “He’s doing it to line his pocket, not educate the public. It can prejudice businesses against the disabled community and it hurts the disabled more if a business closes than if it doesn’t have a ramp. What happened to my right to have a latte when Pony Expresso closed?”
In 2010, federal ADA regulations were revised to bring recreation facilities into compliance. Public swimming pools, sports centers, fitness centers must now have ADA accessible lockers and locks, exercise equipment and stadium seating as well as van parking and accessible entrances. There are updated guidelines for hospital rooms — and compliance must be met by March 15. Any ADA compliance issues not yet resolved will be subject to the 2010, not the 1990 standards. Johnson will have fresh meat.