Tiffany Bond  🦞 🇺🇸Verified account

The ADA isn't new...it became law in 1990. I'm 41 now, I wasn't even old enough to drive. We were still excited about tearing walls down instead of building them in 1990. @PearlJam was just forming. Where were you in 1990? More importantly, how big was your hair?

This is for *existing* public accommodations...we are talking about things that likely violated code to beging with if built since 1990, or people who have had more than a quarter century to figure out that there are disabled people in public spaces.

In yet another shock, disabled people are disabled. For many disabled people, life feels like a futile gesture. Merely getting a donut in NYC can be a 5 hour debacle in a wheelchair. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LhpUJRGrZgc …

This states that you can't start an action based on failure to remove an architectural barrier to access for an existing public accommodation until you've gone through a process...despite being on notice since 1990 such things must be handled NOT by the disabled person.

It would be understandable if this were new law, we had just implemented it, it was a nightmare and we needed to revisit it. Just chant this for the rest of this tweet. 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 1990 Seriously, why are we even doing this? 1990 1990 1990!

There are probably at least a dozen totally inappropriate but functionally demonstrative @nbcsnl skits if you are daft enough you cannot picture this problem.

Have any of you tried to figure out who the owner or operator of an accomodation is before? Sometimes it's easy peasy. Sometimes it's a series of complex LLC to PO Box in Delaware affairs that requires way more than the Hardy Boys to resolve.

Ask yourself how would you write about the doo-hickey thing that's all trippy and part metal with some wood kind of by the door?

Most non-disabled adults would struggle with this requirement. No really, they would. I have a remodeling habit and still have to play charades at home depot for parts on occasion.

You'd better send it certified mail, because they have 60 days to give a written description of what they will do to fix it or make "substantial progress" removing the barrier within 120 days. WTF is substantial progress? Who decides that? When does it have to be done?

There doesn't appear to be any sort of finite date for completion, so I suppose this is where an owner sort of shrugs and says "well, we made substantial process, what's your problem"...forcing the litigation burden back on the disabled person(s).

For clarity, you can provide the description on day 60 and then 120 more days for "substantial progress"...the disabled person is out 180 days after they figured out how to write a letter that is specific enough.

This bill shred alone should show you how easy it is to take a bill written and passed by a majority in the House, and demonstrate it lacking specificity needed to understand properly. Imagine a disabled person being held to similar or higher standards.

A lot of people wouldn't make it to this page and would just send their letter with the best specificity they can, wait 60 days and get a letter back saying "your request did not comply so we aren't doing sh*t".

...or they would ignore it entirely, & if /when a suit is brought they can point to this section and say the letter was non-compliant. There is no affirmative requirement to respond if the letter is insufficient. There is no requirement to say why the letter is insufficient.

The additional requirements: 1. Detail the circumstances you were actually denied access 2. Property address 3. Specific section of the ADA act being violated 4. Whether or not you requested assistance removing the barrier 5. Whether or not the barrier is permanent

It is written so 2-5 are sort of subparts of 1 with "including", but they are really different things.

So for 1...you have to detail "actual" denial. This isn't theoretical or maybe. If there is an alternative, even if cumbersome, inconvenient, or otherwise prohibitive, there is an argument to made that it's not actual denial.

If there is no reason you have to go there, or maybe it's actually private, then again, the burden is on the disabled person to affirmatively state this, before filing - if it's not there, the owner may be able to ignore it.

How many people would just send a letter stating that there is a problem with "X" that is impacting me and could you please fix it?

2. Address seems like a silly thing to get tripped up on, but forget a suite number, get the zip wrong, etc...it might get thrown out. Attorneys get things thrown out ALL THE TIME on technicalities.

3. You have to cite the ADA in the your letter. C'mon. How many of you know how to cite federal code? Now imagine you are disabled, which often impacts your ability to gain an education and your financial resources to hire someone who knows how to do it.

4. You have to say in your request for assistance whether or not you have made a request for assistance. I feel a vicious circle coming on here. Right now it doesn't say you have to have made a verbal or other request, & theoretically you should only have to make one request.

This one makes me uncomfortable. It's one administrative "fix" from yet another step in process. If I had asked before, you can double dog bet I would say "THIS IS MY 3rd TIME WRITING!!!! Why would it even occur to you to say if you haven't previously asked?

The last word on page 5 is "and". In law, "and" means you have to do all of these things or an attorney has a really good shot in court at knocking you out by saying you didn't do it properly and sending you all the way back to the beginning of this board game.

5. Sometimes a barrier will be obviously permanent or temporary, sometimes it's not. There isn't language for "if known" - so it's on a disabled person, who may or may not have the capacity to determine this information, to declare this information. Not properly identified?

It's not clear whether or not the owner can simply ignore your request. The burden again falls on the disabled person to move this forward and they wouldn't even know if they are being ignored for at least 60 days.