No they are professionally disabled. These types go around and sue businesses who don't obey all the disability laws. That's why they are behind over 1000 law suits in the last 2 years.
because in many cases the lease is NNN. Property owner only provides a space. It's up to business owner to renovate the place to meet those requirements. Some requirements, such as providing a ADA table, can only be provided by the business owner.
I'm a lawyer. This is a shakedown, plain and simple -- and the plain text of the law essentially deputizes would be "injured parties" to fink on otherwise regular people. There's a difference between encouraging a "neighborhood watch" type of environment in which neighbors look after each other not only to protect each other but to foster an environment of trust and citizenship. And then there's this: the laws almost work like qui tam suits. This incents someone to prowl a neighborhood and sue. Whatever the plaintiff wins amounts to an effective finders fee. It's pretty sick. Here again, the state's promulgating of a law, the voters--not thinking about the consequences of blowback--voting that law into the books and presto! The loophole litigant.
This has been going on for years. In 2007, I worked at a small family owned retail shop in Oakland, CA. We were served notice about ADA "violations". The notice included a link to a website where the "offending" business could purchase a kit to make them ADA compliant. The notice also stated that if the business was not compliant within 30 days, they would be sued. While I want to see accommodations for people with disabilities, the practice of threatening small businesses is not in the spirit of the ADA regulations, it's just another form of "ambulance chasing". Happy that the Chamber of Commerce and the city are calling out the plaintiffs and are willing to help the businesses.
@@Janedoe-mo6nj you think without the disabled plaintiffs this wouldve happened? The lawyer definitely convinced them but the 2x disabled folks putting their names on 1000 law suits were also looking for easy money. Let's not get it twisted these people did it for all the disabled folks out there, we are not that naive are we?
This is an act of profiting! These two plaintiffs and the firm representing them should be investigated for crimes. I just happen to know that they targeted two small shops in one building but they left another tenant alone. Guess who they didn't suit, Starbucks!! In that Starbucks store there was an ADA table, but it was on the street, surrounded by obstacles. So they can certainly make a case with that. But of course they didn't want to fight a big corporation who can afford lots of lawyer resources. These plaintiffs are demanding more than 20k to 100k of compensation in these cases. WTF? sure, you might find a case that you were in convenient. Why was your inconvenience worth so much? I think it's reasonable to give the business owners warming, and if not fixed within a deadline, fine them.
Here is a bit of some help her for the businesses. "The ADA does not have a provision to "grandfather" a facility but it does have a provision called “safe harbor” in the 2010 ADA regulations for businesses and state and local governments. A "safe harbor" means that you do not have to make modifications to elements in a building that comply with the 1991 ADA Standards(link is external), even if the 2010 ADA Standards(link is external) have different requirements for them. For example the 1991 ADA Standards permitted controls, such as a light switch, to be 54 inches high maximum for a side reach. The 2010 ADA Standards lowered that to 48 inches maximum. If the light switch was installed before March 15, 2012 (the date the 2010 ADA Standards went into effect) it does not need to be lowered to 48 inches. This provision is applied on an element-by-element basis. However, if you choose to alter elements that were in compliance with the 1991 ADA Standards, the altered elements must comply with the 2010 ADA Standards." Check with local city/state regulation to see if your building can be either grandfathered or "safe harbor" clause. Recently Potter Handy Law Firm is being sued by the city for these lawsuits.
Michael Rhambo and Jason Kim now are targeting San Gabriel Valley business owners. one of my friends who own a flower's shop now in this situations. He knew some owners already paid these 2 guys over $5000 to settle the cases. My friend don't know what or who can help him or what he need to do now? can anyone please help our community ????
Why should we care? If they aren't following the law then it is what it is. Should we root for the businesses not following ADA laws or the scumbag lawyer? There are no winners in this story.
Comply with the rules and regulations to conduct normal business given the circumstances within the confines of that business.. The law is the law.. This is the United States of America..🇺🇸 not a the Communist Chinese Country.. you are no longer in Beijing..❓ Second thought maybe we all are.. and have not figured it out yet..❓❓
This law firm, we need to investigate them.......
If they really hit a "connected" restaurant they would be taken out by some older Chinese organizations.
The lawsuits. ARE FRUDLANT.
wheelchair Mafia, perhaps?
These guys are trying to get the small businesses closed. They probably work for a larger person or entity.
There ya go!
No they are professionally disabled. These types go around and sue businesses who don't obey all the disability laws. That's why they are behind over 1000 law suits in the last 2 years.
2 people filed over 1000 lawsuits..... yeah they are trying to get money
People will complain about absolutely anything.
Why should the city pay private businesses to follow the law? What a crock of shit
They want the land
why lawsuits are not going after property owners
because in many cases the lease is NNN. Property owner only provides a space. It's up to business owner to renovate the place to meet those requirements. Some requirements, such as providing a ADA table, can only be provided by the business owner.
@@uswwt not in California
I'm a lawyer. This is a shakedown, plain and simple -- and the plain text of the law essentially deputizes would be "injured parties" to fink on otherwise regular people. There's a difference between encouraging a "neighborhood watch" type of environment in which neighbors look after each other not only to protect each other but to foster an environment of trust and citizenship.
And then there's this: the laws almost work like qui tam suits. This incents someone to prowl a neighborhood and sue. Whatever the plaintiff wins amounts to an effective finders fee. It's pretty sick.
Here again, the state's promulgating of a law, the voters--not thinking about the consequences of blowback--voting that law into the books and presto! The loophole litigant.
This has been going on for years. In 2007, I worked at a small family owned retail shop in Oakland, CA. We were served notice about ADA "violations". The notice included a link to a website where the "offending" business could purchase a kit to make them ADA compliant. The notice also stated that if the business was not compliant within 30 days, they would be sued. While I want to see accommodations for people with disabilities, the practice of threatening small businesses is not in the spirit of the ADA regulations, it's just another form of "ambulance chasing". Happy that the Chamber of Commerce and the city are calling out the plaintiffs and are willing to help the businesses.
Time to sue all the tacos stand
good idea!! ADA at the taco stand interesting
@@dennistani1986 it doesn't meet standards, but does it really matter? Doing what Orlando Garcia would do just to get money out of hard working people
how wheel chair accessible are the lawyers office's, and their respective homes?
as long the store meet the city code. why there law suit? same guy ? clearly extorsion. make them real handicap
Entitled disabled folks? Only in California would this happen.
Nah this is the work of corrupt lawyers.
@@Janedoe-mo6nj you think without the disabled plaintiffs this wouldve happened? The lawyer definitely convinced them but the 2x disabled folks putting their names on 1000 law suits were also looking for easy money. Let's not get it twisted these people did it for all the disabled folks out there, we are not that naive are we?
@@bchandle It's true, but without such lawyers, there wouldn't be such stupid lawsuits.
Lawyers gotta lawyer
Why now ?
Price is a disgusting attorney. They could give a warning. Predatory
Price, you"re not a very good liar ✔️
This is an act of profiting! These two plaintiffs and the firm representing them should be investigated for crimes. I just happen to know that they targeted two small shops in one building but they left another tenant alone. Guess who they didn't suit, Starbucks!! In that Starbucks store there was an ADA table, but it was on the street, surrounded by obstacles. So they can certainly make a case with that. But of course they didn't want to fight a big corporation who can afford lots of lawyer resources.
These plaintiffs are demanding more than 20k to 100k of compensation in these cases. WTF? sure, you might find a case that you were in convenient. Why was your inconvenience worth so much? I think it's reasonable to give the business owners warming, and if not fixed within a deadline, fine them.
There is a china town in la. Whats she talk about
Here is a bit of some help her for the businesses.
"The ADA does not have a provision to "grandfather" a facility but it does have a provision called “safe harbor” in the 2010 ADA regulations for businesses and state and local governments. A "safe harbor" means that you do not have to make modifications to elements in a building that comply with the 1991 ADA Standards(link is external), even if the 2010 ADA Standards(link is external) have different requirements for them. For example the 1991 ADA Standards permitted controls, such as a light switch, to be 54 inches high maximum for a side reach. The 2010 ADA Standards lowered that to 48 inches maximum. If the light switch was installed before March 15, 2012 (the date the 2010 ADA Standards went into effect) it does not need to be lowered to 48 inches. This provision is applied on an element-by-element basis. However, if you choose to alter elements that were in compliance with the 1991 ADA Standards, the altered elements must comply with the 2010 ADA Standards."
Check with local city/state regulation to see if your building can be either grandfathered or "safe harbor" clause.
Recently Potter Handy Law Firm is being sued by the city for these lawsuits.
So they want a pass for stuff the rest of us have had to deal with?
Looks like shakedown to me!
The lawyers working for those cripples need to be disbarred
*if it was African Town this would be called "Racist".*
Sad that are world is so 💰 hungry 😕
Hold them accountable.
And attorneys wonder why they are the butt of jokes. Easy to understand why.
That's the whole point not extortion,you just told on yourself
Is that lettuce in Breed’s hair?
*A crooked developer wants to steal your land using the law.*
Who will make food?
I haven’t eaten Chinese food since the China Plague started.
@@giftedgringo118 did you get out of prison?
Michael Rhambo and Jason Kim now are targeting San Gabriel Valley business owners. one of my friends who own a flower's shop now in this situations. He knew some owners already paid these 2 guys over $5000 to settle the cases. My friend don't know what or who can help him or what he need to do now? can anyone please help our community ????
How fucking ridiculous.
How are businesses considered public spaces?
It would much cheaper to hire gang members who have no heart rondo the right thing. I hope it works out
Why should we care? If they aren't following the law then it is what it is. Should we root for the businesses not following ADA laws or the scumbag lawyer? There are no winners in this story.
great point
Ada is a small part compared to the health inspection that need to be done in those establishments in Chinatown.
Breedbishhhh
Breed should be sued for mismanagement of San Francisco
First comment. Never trust the media.
Crap I was beat by 25 seconds lol
God-bless our Legal system
Let fellen walk the street And make tent Encampments legal While Scumbags attorneys legally extort Business owners.
human are worst than animals
PG&E...👎👎👎👎👎
Hi i pray for all of you right and wrong God Bless You.
Mami baby you love me?✌😁✌lol
Fix things and allow everyone… you have been demanding it from everyone else
Comply with the rules and regulations to conduct normal business given the circumstances within the confines of that business..
The law is the law..
This is the United States of America..🇺🇸
not a the Communist Chinese Country.. you are no longer in Beijing..❓
Second thought maybe we all are.. and have not figured it out yet..❓❓
BOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!#NOTHING NEW
a bit like you, right buddy?