• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Redlands business owners say lawyer is abusing technicalities of ADA

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,709
Location
So. CA
Redlands business owners say lawyer is abusing technicalities of ADA

Chantal M. Lovell, Staff Writer

Posted: 07/22/2010

http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_15577769

Some Redlands businesses say they are under attack from an extortionist who is taking advantage of legal technicalities.

Kathie Thurston, executive director of the Redlands Chamber of Commerce, said an "unscrupulous attorney" from San Diego has been targeting local businesses under the guise of being an advocate for the disabled.

By Tuesday morning, six businesses in the city had contacted her saying they received letters from the attorney notifying them are in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and demanding reparations. The form letter from Attorney James C. Mason details the infractions, instructs the business to make necessary adjustments and pay the sum of $6,500 to keep the matter out of court.

"The Americans with Disabilities Act and related California law requires that as a business or property owner, you make your place of business accessible to the disabled," Mason's letter to one local business states. "Failing to do so in accordance with applicable legally established standards, in particular, disabled parking spaces, is discrimination against the disabled."

Mason said he represents two disabled veterans who do not live in or near Redlands, but come to Loma Linda for medical treatment. He said during those trips, his clients have tried to conduct business in Redlands but were prevented because they could not access business parking lots.

Thurston said the infractions in Redlands all deal with violations in parking lots and seem to primarily be a lack of a tow-away warning sign. Law requires one such sign must be placed at every entrance to the parking lot, among other stipulations.

Mason said he would not target a business that simply lacked a sign, although he is legally allowed to do so.

But business owner Paul Barich, who received a letter claiming his "property did not have any accommodation for parking for the disabled whatsoever" said his only parking lot violation was a missing towing sign.

"We have disabled parking and we have had it," Barich said. "We needed the sign. But, two days after we received the letter, we restriped everything and put in the signs."

Mason said that sign, though it may seem like red tape, is necessary for enforcement.

"The sign is very important," Mason said. "Without the signage, there is no way to get a car towed if they are not supposed to be there."

Thurston said the chamber and business owners want their shops to be accessible to everyone.

But, she said, Mason and his clients are taking advantage of the law at a time when small businesses can least afford it. She said she knows of at least two Redlands businesses that settled with Mason and his client outside court.

"This is legal extortion," Thurston said. "We've got some non-compliance issues out here and we are trying to get businesses to be proactive. In this economy, these businesses are just trying to keep their heads above water and he is out abusing technicalities."

Mason said he could not comment on how many letters had been sent to businesses in Redlands or other cities, but said he has been or is involved with disabled access cases throughout California. He denied any accusations that he or his client are trying to extort money.

"I send a reasonable demand and all the information necessary to help them become compliant," Mason said. "There has to be some incentive to follow the law."

Mason said, by law, his client is entitled to at least $4,000 for damages, plus his attorneys fees.

None of the Redlands business owners have seen, met or spoken with Mason's clients, according to Thurston.

Mason said this is because his client, Carl Barnum according to one letter, was unable to access the parking lots.

Redlands attorney Gregory W. Brittain, who spoke to chamber members Monday about the letters, said Mason and Barnum are within the law, but the way the issue is being approached is questionable.

"(Barnum) is probably a professional plaintiff," Brittain said.

Brittain said businesses need to get out ahead of Mason and make sure they are in compliance with ADA.

Thurston said the trigger for the letters seems to be parking lot infractions, so businesses should start renovations there. She said the Chamber can help find contractors to do the work and bring small businesses up to code.

What to do if you receive a letter

Redlands attorney Gregory W. Brittain said businesses have several options if they receive a letter saying they are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Brittain said it is up to businesses whether they want to contact an attorney upon receiving a letter, but they should bring their property up to full technical compliance with the law.

Follow-up options:

• Settle with the attorney, but negotiate the demand down.

• Go to court and defend yourself or hire an attorney to do so.

• Pool resources with other businesses and mount a defense in court as a group.

For information on resources available to bring your business into compliance, contact the Redlands Chamber of Commerce at 909-793-2546.

Read more: http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_15577769#ixzz0uVf9IKmc
 
Where in the ADAAG does it state that a tow sign must be posted. I do not recall ever seeing it in the current Federal Law? Is this just a California thing or is it in 2003 ICC/ANSI A117.1 as well?
 
mark handler said:
That's why so many people moved here
I used present tense. You used past tense. Big difference.

BTW. Illinois, where I am located, is screwed for second place. So don't take it too personal. I wish I could run.
 
rktect 1 said:
I used present tense. You used past tense. Big difference.BTW. Illinois, where I am located, is screwed for second place. So don't take it too personal. I wish I could run.
Yes, I did use past tense. I'ts not a lawsuit issue, it's a jobs, issue.
 
Sorry. I never should have said word one and left it as it was.

You like CA and think its a jobs issue. Fine and good.
 
Top