Hooters restaurant brand logo

Non-Compliance, What's The Harm Or Real Risk!

Tag Along Lawsuits


Thanks to the decision in Haynes v Hooters, unless the case pending against your organization is a class action lawsuit (a few are, many are not) other individuals may sue while your organization is sorting out reaching or implementing an agreement in the first lawsuit.

In the case of Hooters, the defendant was actively implementing the agreed-to settlement from the first lawsuit, when the second lawsuit was filed. The court said the prior settlement didn’t matter, and allowed the second case to proceed.

This case may not be necessarily binding in your jurisdiction, but it is definitely persuasive. The result of Hooters is that ALL of the issues and costs identified above get multiplied by close to 2 (or even more) — there will be some economies of scale, but not on all the items.

 

Physical Access Complaints Lead To Orders To Remediate Websites

There has been more than one case where a complaint to the DOJ regarding physical access has led to an order to remediate the website as well. Even when the physical access complaint is not substantiated ! I have seen this happen at least twice, and I am sure there are more cases out there than this.

Here is how this happens:

  1. Disabled customer complains about physical access (in one case it was about parking spaces, in the other, how chairs were organized in a waiting room blocked wheelchair access).
  2. DOJ opens an investigation
  3. The investigation, once opened, can investigate *ANYTHING*
  4. DOJ finds in its investigation that the defendant’s website is not accessible
  5. DOJ orders defendant to fix many things, which includes inaccessible website.

 

Conclusion

Fix It Fast & Thorough Or You Will Be Made To fix It -Your Choice Because Your Risk Is Certain!