Serial litigant

[germdoc]

Not sure how I feel about this:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...9.story?page=1

I tend to have sympathy for the disabled, but I'm glad he lives in California...

[crokett]

If it is truly not about the money, then don't settle. Force them to fix it. Or if it is not about the money then donate the settlements to disabled support groups.

[RAFlorida]

I am a disabled person, with that said,

I find what he is doing is for money alone. At least 300K in one year! California needs to change their system. If a company needs to correct something for the handycapped, bring it to their attention, or if need be bring it to the court. But don't make money from it.

[dbhost]

Plain and simple, this guy is using the ADA as a weapon for extortion. Another example of the law of unintended consequences. I think the ADA was well intended, but the cost to business to retrofit, particularly to small business, is unmanageable, and this sort of thing just might put more American businesses out of business. Is that what we want as a society?

The bit about he condiment stand being 1/2" too high is just asinine, if you can't get it yourself, as for help for pete's sake!

[Uncle Cracker]

It doesn't seem to me that he is acting in good faith, but rather out of greed or some kind of weird obsession.

[docrowan]

Simple solution to frivilous lawsuit - "loser pays". This means loser pays all court costs and ALL (including winner's) legal fees. Right now there is no dis-incentive for an opportunist to file a lawsuit.

[Tom Slick]

Look familiar? http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2293830.story

Jarek Molski came through my area a few years ago with EXACTLY the same MO. He brought about 50 lawsuits in the county. I agree that neither is acting in good faith, they are attempting to profit from instances where they could have been wronged but weren't. On the other hand it gave quite a few local businesses a push to become ADA compliant which is truely important.

[dbhost]

So on the ADA question. Where's the funds to permit cash strapped small businesses to become ADA compliant? It's this sort of silliness causing banks to have braille on drive up ATMs after all...

[jackellis]

It's not just the law of unintended consequences. We all react to incentives and in this case, there's a pretty powerful incentive to sue small business owners.

Flying, even for recreational purposes, is a life-and-death matter that affects the lives of pilots, passengers and bystanders. the FAA has some pretty rigorous regulations for tracking maintenance and it imposes qualification requirements on mechanics and inspectors, but it does not lay out a precise series of steps for how to conduct annual inspections, for example. In other words, there's room for a reasonable level of discretion in how one follows the FAA's rules.

In the case of the ADA, common sense has flown out the window. Lawsuits over counters that are a half inch too high are just absurd. Someone ought to ask what disabled folks would do if all of those businesses folded up because ADA compliance costs were too high? You can't eat out over the Internet, can you?

[germdoc]

Interesting side story: a friend of mine is paraplegic and does medical work in Cambodia. I was with him at a conference in San Diego, and we discussed the difficulties getting around even in a place that is as handicapped-accessible as southern CA. (We had a heckuva time finding a cab that could accomodate him and his wheelchair.)

He said it's easier getting around in Cambodia, because there are alway able-bodied young men around who will carry him up stairs or wherever he needs to go for a quarter or so tip. They are not used to seeing people in wheelchairs BTW, as most paraplegics don't have a long life expectancy in that country.

[Tom Slick]

The problem is we make second class citizens out of the disabled when their needs are ignored. You've got a war Vet in a wheel chair, both legs missing, who wants a steak dinner or maybe to do some Christmas shopping but "sorry I've only got the money to stay in businesses serving those who can walk through the door". What about the family on vacation with a kid with cerebral palsy that needs to use the bathroom while dining in a restaurant? "Sorry our restroom is only for folks with full motor skills."

[cabinetman]

The guy might have an insatiable anger for his disability that drives him to "get even" any way he can. Definitely a gold digger. At his rate he'll have a limo and a driver, all his meals will be catered, and he'll have someone do his shopping.
.

[JR]

There once was a man in my town whose wife was disabled. He was a very diligent advocate for ADA compliance, reviewing all new construction and remodel permit applications, speaking at planning commission and city council meetings, etc.

Unfortunately he was also disabled in a way. He was personality challenged. What a dick. He accomplished a great deal in both awareness and compliance, but nobody wanted to do the work because he was such a clown.

JR

[LCHIEN]

i have great sympathy for the disabled, but I believe folks like him on a crusade/obsession can be a pain. He has to have some sympahty for the businessmen, too, bringing facilities, especially for older buildings, to compliance will costs thousands and probably non-compliance was inadvertant. Its hard to make that much money back. Its unfortunate the law gives them so little flexibility. What the guy does with the money makes a difference. I can see blackmailers out there with a sense of empowerment from these laws just chomping at the bit to make non-productive income.

[dbhost]

Oh I'm not saying that disabled access is a bad thing, but at what cost, and who is to carry that cost?

I do think that all new commercial construction should be ADA compliant. But let's go through a scenario here...

Bob scrimps and saves his ashtray off to start Bob's Pizza Bonanza in his hometown. He finds a location that he can afford to lease, he works with a professional architect to design the interior of the space in the strip mall, and even gets permits from the city (that has reviewed the plans), and approval from his landlord to do all the work, including adding disabled parking spaces. Now this work is farmed out to a contractor. Now say for example the wheelchair ramp ends up being built with a run 1" too short for the total rise, even though the specifications given to the contractor call for the proper run.

Now a couple of years go by, Bob is busting his backside, running a typical small business, that he THINKS he has all his ADA issues covered, and along comes this lawsuit happy extortionist with a tape measure who drags him into court over something as insignificant as a ramp not being in spec. (I am not saying this ramp keeps the disabled out, just that it is not in spec.). Now who would be liable for this?

Why on earth do we have laws on the books in an allegedly free society where citizens, and business owners have to fear being dragged into court when they are expending good faith efforts, and a sizable chunk of their hard earned resources? Simply put, common sense is in the toilet here...