I can’t pinpoint the exact moment I realized my daughter would never walk. From the earliest doctor’s appointments, my wife and I knew Jordan would be a special blessing with unique gifts and challenges. What we didn’t know was that she would challenge us daily to see beyond physical barriers to love deeply, hope recklessly, and breathe in life’s joy with unrestrained optimism.
The Americans with Disabilities Act is legislation that as a policymaker I respect and as a father of a disabled child I am profoundly grateful for. But there is a growing phenomenon among the profit-hungry to use the compliance requirements in the ADA as a tool to exploit well-meaning property owners for a quick settlement.
This problem is often referred to as “vexatious litigation,” or lawsuits that are not pursued to correct a wrong or benefit those for whom the law was designed — like my daughter Jordan. Instead, a potential plaintiff will use satellite imagery or an old fashioned drive-by of a property to scope it out for potential ADA compliance violations. They, then send vague and ambiguous demand letters to the property owners, often small businesses, alleging a compliance violation with no information about the violation, no opportunity to remedy the access issue and ultimately no interest in ensuring compliance. Forcing an expensive settlement is the goal, not ensuring access or compliance.
Unfortunately, nothing in current law requires the plaintiffs to provide any information about the compliance violation to the property owners prior, during or after litigation. If improving access is the goal of litigation, then why is it so absent from the “pay us now or pay us more later” threats by the plaintiffs?
Last month, I co-sponsored legislation with my colleague Congressman Ted Poe, R-Texas – the ADA Education and Reform Act of 2015, HR 3765 – modeled after the best practices in many states, to ensure ambitious attorneys aren’t able to force property owners into costly settlements without giving them information and a reasonable amount of time to fix any compliance barriers.
Frivolous demand letters shift the focus away from the purpose of the ADA: ensuring access for the disability community. Instead, the sole purpose of these demand letters is to achieve a quick payday. Those who suffer actual harm from compliance violations deserve to have their day in court and receive just compensation. The goals of ADA litigation should be justice for those physically denied access and permanent compliance.
For the intent of the law to be fully realized, we must create an environment of partnership between the disability community and property owners. Drive-by litigation lines the pockets of opportunistic attorneys at the expense of small businesses, local governments and the disability community. When tens of thousands of dollars are spent to settle compliance claims, the property owners are left without the financial means or information to make repairs and ensure their facilities are fully accessible.
I believe in the ADA. I rely on the legal protections it provides to those such as my daughter to have the same opportunities and experiences that everyone else enjoys. But in its current state, the ADA falls far short of this goal. We can do better. We can restore focus to the partnership of property owners and the disability community by leaving profit-hungry, drive-by litigation specialists out of the equation.
U.S. Rep. Douglas A. “Doug” Collins, a Republican, represents the 9th Congressional District of Georgia.
About the Author
