APEX Trial Law – ADA Website Lawsuits/Demand Letters
Karlin Law Firm LLP defends these claims and also works with businesses, website owners, web developers and webmasters to bring websites into compliance in a way that will avoid ADA violations claims. Web developers will often focus on WCAG 2.0 or WCAG 2.1, but much more needs to be addressed, and knowledge and experience in the current state of the law are critical to protect businesses, which needs to be explained to the web developer working on a website. Karlin Law Firm LLP has resolved and consulted on over 4,000 ADA cases, half of which are now website lawsuits and cases. We defend and provide the needed guidance in website compliance.
Here is an example of a letter below:
VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
Attn: Legal Dept.
123 Main St.
City, State, Zip Code
Re: Violations of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act – (your website)
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Please give this letter your immediate attention.
Apex Trial Law has been retained by Mr. Michael Sandoval, a blind individual, to prosecute an action against (Your business) for violations of the California Unruh Rights Act. Mr. Sandoval was unable to fully access your website at (Your Website) because the website is not fully accessible to the blind. This kept him from enjoying the products offered both on the website.
A Website Accessibility Evaluation (“WAVE”) protocol demonstrates that (Your Website) contains numerous accessibility barriers which keep both Mr. Sandoval other blind persons, and vision impaired persons from equal and fair use and enjoyment of your website. The website’s deficiencies are demonstrated in detail in Exhibit One of the attached Draft Complaint.
There exists a common standard, by which websites can be made available to the blind. W3C is an international website standards organization. W3C has published Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, known as “WCAG 2.0.” The WCAG 2.0 Level AA, are nearly universally accepted and provide adequate controls to allow visually impaired individuals to access the internet. There is a large list of countries, state and local governments, technology companies, and educational institutions that have adopted these guidelines. The NFB, a leading advocacy organization for the blind, has adopted it, and the federal government has used it. See Andrews v. Blick Art Materials, LLC, 286 F. Supp.3d 365, 386 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 21, 2017). Your failure to follow these standards means that (Your Website), a “place of public accommodation,” does not comport with Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C.;12101 et seq.). Pursuant to the Unruh Act, any violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act also equates to the violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. CA Civil Code; 51 (f)).
Damages for such barriers to access are set by statute at $4,000 for each and every instance in which my client was unable to access the website. CA Civil Code; 52. We urge you to take immediate action to remediate the website access barriers. My client has instructed Apex Trial Law to file an ADA action on his behalf within twenty-one days of sending this demand. If you believe that the assertions herein are erroneous, or if you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me immediately.
Ryan M. Ferrell, Esq.