This act establishes a 30-day notice and cure period before a lawsuit can be filed regarding certain architectural barrier violations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Michael Lawler
Representative
NY-17
The ADA 30 Days to Comply Act establishes a mandatory notice and cure period before a lawsuit can be filed regarding architectural barrier violations in existing public accommodations. This requires an individual to first provide the owner with detailed written notice of the specific barrier. The owner then has 30 days to respond with a plan for removal, and a lawsuit can only proceed if the owner fails to respond or fails to make substantial progress on the removal plan.
New ADA Bill Mandates 30-Day Warning Period for Businesses Before Accessibility Lawsuits
The “ADA 30 Days to Comply Act” introduces a major procedural change to how the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is enforced regarding architectural barriers in existing public spaces. Currently, if a business or property owner has an inaccessible entrance, restroom, or path, an individual can file a lawsuit to enforce compliance. This bill changes that process by inserting a mandatory waiting period before any legal action can start.
The New Paperwork Hurdle
Under this proposed change to Section 308(a)(1) of the ADA, if you encounter an architectural barrier—say, a ramp that’s too steep or a missing grab bar in a restroom—you can’t just file a civil action right away. First, you must send a detailed written notice to the owner or operator. This notice needs to be specific enough to identify the barrier, but it also has to detail the circumstances of the denied access, including the property address and whether you asked for assistance at the time. Essentially, it turns enforcement into a two-step process: detailed notification, then litigation.
The 30-Day Clock Starts Now
Once the owner gets this detailed notice, a 30-day clock begins. During this “cure period,” the owner must respond with a written description of the improvements they plan to make to remove the barrier. If they fail to respond within those 30 days, or if they send a plan but then fail to remove the barrier or make “substantial progress” within the next 30 days (if the fix is complicated), then—and only then—can the lawsuit proceed. This means the fastest a person can get to court is 30 days, and potentially 60 days or more, depending on the complexity of the fix.
Who Benefits, Who Waits?
For property owners and businesses, this is a clear win. It gives them a defined window—at least a month—to fix accessibility issues without immediately facing the cost and stress of litigation. If a small business owner missed an obscure code requirement, they get a chance to fix it quickly and cheaply before lawyers get involved. This could potentially reduce the number of lawsuits filed against businesses that are willing to comply but just need a heads-up.
However, for individuals with disabilities, this bill adds a significant layer of bureaucracy and delay to the enforcement of their civil rights. The whole point of the ADA is equal access, and if access is denied today, this bill says you must wait at least 30 days before you can even ask a court to intervene. For someone who relies on immediate access, this is a major hurdle. It shifts the burden of enforcement from immediate legal remedy to mandatory negotiation and waiting. Imagine needing access to a doctor’s office or a pharmacy, finding a barrier, and knowing you have to wait a month or two before any legal pressure can be applied to fix it. This mandatory wait time could significantly delay access to public accommodations for people who need them now.