• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

'A decades-old Sacramento, Calif. burger joint is shutting its doors for being out of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act because the owner says he can’t afford to bring it up to code.

Ford’s Real Hamburgers has been slinging burgers, fries and shakes for years, but was hit hard in the recession. Now, KTXL-TV is reporting that a local attorney who makes his living filing ADA cases — many on his own behalf — is suing the restaurant — and Ford‘s can’t keep up.'
Sacramento California Landmark Ford’s Real Hamburgers Forced to Shut Down Over ADA Lawsuit | Video | TheBlaze.com

So the attorney failed to achieve the supposed objective of a compliant restaurant. Now there is no restaurant.
 
I know that but it seems like a short court appearance and it might cost a few thousand dollars but that is all in the cost of doing business.

I don't see it as a reason to shut the doors unless something bigger is going on here.

And eventually all those "cost of doing business" items that keep getting added that wasn't planned for put your business under.
 
Now the able-bodied have the same access as the disabled, maybe they can imagine how it feels to be excluded.
 
Now the able-bodied have the same access as the disabled, maybe they can imagine how it feels to be excluded.

Other than this sleazy lawyer, who was excluded? How many complaints have been made in the last 22 years against this business? As for the 6 people who will now be unemployed...screw 'em, right?
 
What both of you miss is that the ADA only requires New Buildings and Buildings which are undergoing renovation to meet its criteria. If you have a building built prior to the ADA and you don't renovate it, there is no requirement for you to be handicapped accessible.

I know in California, there is an attorney in San Diego that goes around looking at old buildings and the shark requires them to pay him a fee or he takes them to court. The guy is a scam artist.

This is how ****ed California is, these are old town buildings that he goes after are a 100 yrs old.

"Exhibit A is Theodore Pinnock, a disabled lawyer in San Diego. Pinnock & Wakefield, his law firm, has filed more than 2,000 ADA lawsuits against California businesses, touting a 95-percent settlement rate. In March, he demanded $10,500 from each of 40 businesses in Alpine, California, or he would sue alleging ADA violations. The incident surprised many local storeowners, who believed they were in compliance.

In January, Pinnock finished filing four class-action lawsuits against dozens of businesses in Julian, California. The suits stemmed from Pinnock’s visit to the historic Gold Rush town two months earlier. Pinnock claims his weekend was spoiled by the noncompliance of a number of small businesses.

Days after Pinnock returned home from vacation, 67 Julian mom-and-pop stores received letters demanding varying amounts of money in compensation—the smallest being $2,500—and ordering physical changes to the business establishments. If his demands were not met, Pinnock threatened to sue under state law, making them potentially liable for $125,000 in attorney fees, payable to Pinnock of course.

Because Pinnock is disabled, he often files ADA lawsuits on his own behalf or under one of his unincorporated associations. According to an insider, Pinnock admits to being the only disabled member of one association, with the remainder being family members. Pinnock says the money he demands is for his legal work. If Pinnock’s money demands are not met, he sues.

A few Julian storeowners negotiated settlements with Pinnock in exchange for temporary lawsuit immunity. Pinnock has given some of these businesses three years to fix access issues, confirming that money, not quick compliance, drives his lawsuits. So far, two of the four lawsuits have been settled.

Many businesses have refused to settle, fearing they will become easy targets and be sued again, though all favor making reasonable accommodations to comply with access laws. Some owners have offered to use their money to make access changes instead of settlement payments, but Pinnock has refused, again confirming that money is his motivation.

The longer a business delays settling, the higher Pinnock raises the settlement amount, ultimately suing the holdouts. Four businesses, including Bell, Book and Candle, a Julian specialty shop, have closed their doors citing Pinnock as the last straw.

Though distasteful, Pinnock’s actions are legal. His siege of businesses in Julian and Alpine illustrates how legal extortion thrives in the Golden State. Flaws in state law make it easy for professional shakedown artists to file suits, line their pockets, and shutter businesses.

Pinnock is determined to continue this practice. After local media began reporting on the Julian siege, Pinnock issued a warning on his firm’s website: “I am putting businesses on notice today to hire an ADA consultant, do a survey, take out a loan, and remove all barriers immediately. The ADA plaintiffs will increase lawsuits immediately. . . . I have no more compassion for businesses and respect for certain news reporters.”

California: Gold Mine for Legal Extortion | Conservative News, Views & Books
 
Other than this sleazy lawyer, who was excluded? How many complaints have been made in the last 22 years against this business? As for the 6 people who will now be unemployed...screw 'em, right?
Zero. In fact, my understanding is that almost NONE of the hundreds of businesses this guy sues have ever had a complaint regarding this stuff. In fact, in the OP video they interviewed a customer who is paralyzed from the neck down and confined to a wheelchair. He has been going to Ford's for 21 years, never had an issue, and says that this lawsuit is definitely not on HIS behalf. This lawyer is just trying to extort money and line his own pockets. If he shuts down a business and puts people out of work in the process, so be it.
 
Good.

Handicapped people have rights too... You can't just ignore them because you "can't afford" to make your restaurant handicap accessible.
 
The government has no place to say a business has to have a bathroom or a bathroom with doors so big or anything else. A business owner should have the freedom to have whatever doors they want and let consumers decide if he should stay open by either eating there or not.

Exactly...you nailed it.

These are NOT public buildings, this is (I assume) private property.

A home/business owner should have the right to make his/her property as much or as little wheelchair accessible as they wish.
 
Last edited:
I know in California, there is an attorney in San Diego that goes around looking at old buildings and the shark requires them to pay him a fee or he takes them to court. The guy is a scam artist.

This is how ****ed California is, these are old town buildings that he goes after are a 100 yrs old.

"Exhibit A is Theodore Pinnock, a disabled lawyer in San Diego. Pinnock & Wakefield, his law firm, has filed more than 2,000 ADA lawsuits against California businesses, touting a 95-percent settlement rate. In March, he demanded $10,500 from each of 40 businesses in Alpine, California, or he would sue alleging ADA violations. The incident surprised many local storeowners, who believed they were in compliance.

In January, Pinnock finished filing four class-action lawsuits against dozens of businesses in Julian, California. The suits stemmed from Pinnock’s visit to the historic Gold Rush town two months earlier. Pinnock claims his weekend was spoiled by the noncompliance of a number of small businesses.

Days after Pinnock returned home from vacation, 67 Julian mom-and-pop stores received letters demanding varying amounts of money in compensation—the smallest being $2,500—and ordering physical changes to the business establishments. If his demands were not met, Pinnock threatened to sue under state law, making them potentially liable for $125,000 in attorney fees, payable to Pinnock of course.

Because Pinnock is disabled, he often files ADA lawsuits on his own behalf or under one of his unincorporated associations. According to an insider, Pinnock admits to being the only disabled member of one association, with the remainder being family members. Pinnock says the money he demands is for his legal work. If Pinnock’s money demands are not met, he sues.

A few Julian storeowners negotiated settlements with Pinnock in exchange for temporary lawsuit immunity. Pinnock has given some of these businesses three years to fix access issues, confirming that money, not quick compliance, drives his lawsuits. So far, two of the four lawsuits have been settled.

Many businesses have refused to settle, fearing they will become easy targets and be sued again, though all favor making reasonable accommodations to comply with access laws. Some owners have offered to use their money to make access changes instead of settlement payments, but Pinnock has refused, again confirming that money is his motivation.

The longer a business delays settling, the higher Pinnock raises the settlement amount, ultimately suing the holdouts. Four businesses, including Bell, Book and Candle, a Julian specialty shop, have closed their doors citing Pinnock as the last straw.

Though distasteful, Pinnock’s actions are legal. His siege of businesses in Julian and Alpine illustrates how legal extortion thrives in the Golden State. Flaws in state law make it easy for professional shakedown artists to file suits, line their pockets, and shutter businesses.

Pinnock is determined to continue this practice. After local media began reporting on the Julian siege, Pinnock issued a warning on his firm’s website: “I am putting businesses on notice today to hire an ADA consultant, do a survey, take out a loan, and remove all barriers immediately. The ADA plaintiffs will increase lawsuits immediately. . . . I have no more compassion for businesses and respect for certain news reporters.”

California: Gold Mine for Legal Extortion | Conservative News, Views & Books

Couldn't this attorney be brought up on charges of extorsion?

Why would somebody need to pay him in the law suit. The law suit would be to make the building compliant, not for him to receive money.
 
Good.

Handicapped people have rights too... You can't just ignore them because you "can't afford" to make your restaurant handicap accessible.

This is not a public building.

How is a disabled person's life going to be irreparably damaged by not being able to easily use a bathroom at a burger joint?

This isn't a hospital...this is a fast food place...just eat somewhere else.


Disabled people should have access to all publicly owned facilities.

But not to ALL private facilities by law.

Being hugely fat is a disability.

Does that mean that every door in every business must be widened so 500 pound people can easily get through them?

Does that mean every single airline seat must be wider so that these 500 pound people can sit down in them?
 
Couldn't this attorney be brought up on charges of extorsion?
Not in California. Our state motto might as well be "No Businesses Allowed".
Why would somebody need to pay him in the law suit. The law suit would be to make the building compliant, not for him to receive money.
He agrees not to file suit or to give them long extensions if they settle out of court and pay him money.
 
Couldn't this attorney be brought up on charges of extorsion?

Why would somebody need to pay him in the law suit. The law suit would be to make the building compliant, not for him to receive money.

Good question, these buildings were in Julian an historic town. All the Julian shop owners fought it like hill, they all wanted to keep the buildings completely original. The San Diego attorney was suing them for no handicapped access. So he went to them and said pay me XX dollars and I will not sue you. If you don't pay I will sue you and win and you will make the modifications and you will pay me my attorneys fees. Making them potentially liable for $125,000 in attorney fees, payable to Pinnock of course. The **** was a real hardass.
 
Anyone watch the South Park episode about raising the bar?
 
If the ADA law is reasonable, why did congress exempt themselves from the law?
"There shall be no state immunity from action under the ADA, but Congress remains exempt, although it must abide by certain internal requirements. "
The Council for Disability Rights

Originally Posted by Voltaire X

"Good. Handicapped people have rights too... You can't just ignore them because you "can't afford" to make your restaurant handicap accessible."

Absolutely right, Voltaire. So the business goes under, will pay no more taxes, its employees are now unemployed and people who enjoyed eating there can go somewhere else. I might be wrong but I think the problem was with the counters. The tables were okay for handicapped people but the counters weren't.

So, business closed, people unemployed, tax revenues down. Ah, the liberal dream in action. Oh, and not a single handicapped person will ever again sit at one of their tables and eat a damned hamburger. Another liberal dream come true.
 
Good.

Handicapped people have rights too... You can't just ignore them because you "can't afford" to make your restaurant handicap accessible.

Don't ever let anyone tell you you're reasonable, because they'd be wrong.
 
'A decades-old Sacramento, Calif. burger joint is shutting its doors for being out of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act because the owner says he can’t afford to bring it up to code.

Ford’s Real Hamburgers has been slinging burgers, fries and shakes for years, but was hit hard in the recession. Now, KTXL-TV is reporting that a local attorney who makes his living filing ADA cases — many on his own behalf — is suing the restaurant — and Ford‘s can’t keep up.'

Sacramento California Landmark Ford’s Real Hamburgers Forced to Shut Down Over ADA Lawsuit | Video | TheBlaze.com

We had a.POS here in san diego doing that.crap.

He actually got banned from further.suits.
 
Don't ever let anyone tell you you're reasonable, because they'd be wrong.

Care to explain why plenty of small businesses are perfectly fine with complying with a 20+ year old piece of legislation, but this one can't afford to?
 
Care to explain why plenty of small businesses are perfectly fine with complying with a 20+ year old piece of legislation, but this one can't afford to?

Perfectly fine?

How could a company be forced by government order to incur additional expenses that affect - usually at most - an extremely small portion of their clientele be 'perfectly fine' with it?

Sure, these companies will publicly claim - for PR purposes - they are 'perfectly fine' with it.

But privately?

They will hate yet another layer of expenses forced upon them by government.


The ones that cater to disabled persons will already have made the changes without the law.

And those that do not will thus incur added expenses for little/no expected return because of the law.


I will ask again - how will a person in a wheelchair be irreparably harmed by not having easy access to a restroom in a fast food joint?

This is not a hospital or a courtroom. It's a burger stand.

If someone in a wheelchair doesn't want to go in without an easy access restroom?

Then don't go in.
 
Last edited:
The ADA needs to be changed. If the act is really about disabled access, and nothing else, then...

1) All complaints must first be processed through the local building compliance department,
2) IF deemed legit, upon notification, the building/business owner has a reasonable time, 6-12 months depending on the magnitude of the upgrades, to bring the premises up to code,
3) Once upgrades are complete and approved by said local building compliance department, the complaint is permanently dismissed,
4) If the building/business owner does not bring the property up to code, then and only then, would the plaintiff be allowed to sue for damages.
 
What else we're losing...

...as the small guy loses again, we move closer to a society where only corporate McDonaldism completely takes over because the large corporations will be the only ones who can afford to absorb crap like this.
 
Care to explain why plenty of small businesses are perfectly fine with complying with a 20+ year old piece of legislation, but this one can't afford to?
Are you serious? There are plenty of reasons why that may be. Maybe their buildings are newer, and were built with different, more current standards in mind. Even if not, some renovations require less construction and redesign than others. It totally depends on what the violation is, and how difficult and expensive it is to fix. Plus, not all businesses make the same amount of money, dude. Not all small business owners are rich; some are barely able to make ends meet and squeak out a reasonably comfortable living. This was a hamburger stand, not a doctors office :roll:
 
I live close to Sacramento, and this was sad news when it broke a few weeks ago. With the downturn in economy, lower revenues overall, then this sudden lawsuit costing tens of thousands of dollars to defend and more tens of thousands of dollars to comply, the family-owned restaurant simply could not survive. It closed its doors.

To those who smugly grin, "good, now they know how it feels to be excluded", a pox on you. Now they, like millions of other economically devastated Americans, know what it feels like to have lost everything they've worked their entire lives for to a shyster scam-artist who makes a living extorting small businesses based on ill-written, poorly executed laws. You must be so thrilled. Yay, you. :(
 
Good question, these buildings were in Julian an historic town. All the Julian shop owners fought it like hill, they all wanted to keep the buildings completely original. The San Diego attorney was suing them for no handicapped access. So he went to them and said pay me XX dollars and I will not sue you. If you don't pay I will sue you and win and you will make the modifications and you will pay me my attorneys fees. Making them potentially liable for $125,000 in attorney fees, payable to Pinnock of course. The **** was a real hardass.

Why would the judge awards attorneys fees in a case like this?

There was no contract between the property owner and the attorney to cover his fees so I don't see why they would be responsible for them.
 
Back
Top Bottom