Stop frequent filers from claiming they can't afford to pay court filing fees: A growing group of individuals rountinely file ADA lawsuits by the dozen (or hundreds) without paying the filing fees by representing to the Court that they can't afford to pay those expenses; despite this, they receive many thousands of dollars in income from settlements, which is often not disclosed to the Court. Solution: Particularly in this time of limited state resources, limit the number of lawsuits for financial damages any person can file without paying the filing fee to three, and require applicants to disclose settlement proceeds received from lawsuits in which fees have been waived.
Give business owners absolute certainty about the changes they need to make-- and don't need to make-- to avoid ADA/accessibility lawsuits in California. Instead of having an uncertain ("readily achievable") standard, in which plaintiffs and defendant argue about whether a business could have afforded to make a particular change, post a list of conditions which are clearly unacceptable.
Make a CASp clearance dispositive: CASp Inspectors often disagree on changes a business needs to make to receive a Certificate of Compliance. Plaintiff's can also challenge a CASp's determination without any significant consequence. There need to be significant protections for a business which does everything a CASp Inspector recommends and receives a Certificate of Compliance. Solution: Create an arrangement whereby a Certificate of Compliance issued by a CASp Inspector is a presumption of accessibilty compliance for the particular areas inspected (i.e., if the conditions sued on were inspected and cleared by a CASp Inspector and remain unchanged, and a defendant promptly notifies plaintiff of this, Defendant can get his/her legal fees reimbursed if lawsuit not quickly withdrawn.
Require plaintiffs to certify the particular conditions they encountered at the defendant's location which they claim presented problems for their particular disabilities; this certification should be clear and unambiguous, and should be separate from any listing of other conditions which may have been noticed at the property. Plaintiffs commonly list large numbers of accessibility conditions at properties without confirming which ones form the basis for their financial damages claims; often, they claim they will amend their pleadings later, and may be entitled to do so up until the date of trial. The verification portion should be signed by the plaintiff under penalty of perjury. Hundreds of lawsuits have been exposed in which the claims made involved conditions which had never been experienced by the plaintiffs or would not have caused a problem for their particular disabilities.