And there it is…you want to take legal action because the gym won’t purchase a piece of equipment just for you.
What started out as you implying (IMO) that this was all about that parking lot incident, then turned into you not having access to a particular machine and has now morphed into them not having a specific handicapped accessible machine. Is there some reason you couldn’t have mentioned, right in your OP, that the letter you sent to the DOJ, was because you wanted the gym to buy a lat-pulldown machine that works with wheelchairs.
Funny how it took us 58 posts to get you to spit that out. I believe I commented on that earlier.
So, does every gym in the US need to duplicate each piece of equipment with a handicap version? In theory, if you were to win this, they would.
Also I’m off to work so it’ll have to wait till I get there, but I’m pretty sure the Safe Harbor law you’ve been mentioning doesn’t cover this. From what I remember, all they will have to do is make it possible for you to get to each machine, not make it possible for you to use each machine and certainly not purchase any special machines for you to use.
But I’m sure you’ve read it more carefully then I have, maybe you could just find the relevant sections and post it here for me.
jamiemcgarry, please do not give the names of the people you’re fighting with. Inappropriate at best in this venue. We are not here to serve as a bludgeon in your fight.
Jamie, at some point I read/saw the story of a guy (in a wheelchair, IIRC) who was making a very good living out of filing ADA violation lawsuits. I may be misremembering; it may have been in a novel, if so nevermind. Have you ever considered doing something similar?
I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what he’s considering. It’s the jamiemcgarry equivalent of “slipping” in the aisle of a different grocery store every few months.
The level of entitlement Jamie has shown on this board, and in this thread alone, just makes my skin crawl. Feels really no different than people who fake injuries so they can live on workers comp or govt disability (nothing against the people that truly need it, which I believe includes some people here on the Dope) but we all know about the people who abuse the system so they can get a free ride in life on the taxpayers dime — and that’s exactly how Jamie comes across to me.
Was that they guy that would show up at bars and restaurants (yes, he was in a wheelchair) with his tape measure, protractor and lawyer and then sue them for things like the ramp being off my a single degree or the sink being a quarter inch too low. Yeah, I remember that story. The problem with him was that he was suing places that he A)didn’t go to so it’s not that he had a problem with them and B)no one else had a problem. Sure, maybe the ramp was off by one degree but no one else in a wheel chair had complained about it. He was just out to make money. That guy was quite a jerk. “I got an idea, I’m going to sue people and personally make lots of money and probably put places out of business based on things that while technically illegal really aren’t bothering anyone” I wonder if that guy over goes 1mph over the speed limit or rolls through a stop sign at 3am?
But I think that’s a slightly different then what’s going on here.
Every time Jamie posts about his “crusade”, one of us should donate a dollar to the HHMC.
Yes, the place that he wants to sue the pants off of is part of a medical center that raises donations to help give medical care to the underprivileged.
I think by the time we’re done, they’ll have enough money to buy a new NON-HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE lat pull-down machine.
Correct. The letter is not a dismissal of the merits or an endorsement of the merits.
If I can, perhaps I can sort of reframe your complaint as I understand it? Tell me if I’m close:
The gym barred you after the parking lot incident. However, that was a pretext, an excuse. The real, or at least major contributing reason was your on-going complaint about the gym’s failure to provide accessible equipment, specifically a lat pull-down machine.
Judging by the car Jamie was posing in in the original article he had posted, I doubt he needs that to make a living. It sounds more like he needs to vent a lot, on other people.
How long have you been waiting for your three party sit down?
If the club can show that they banned you because you acted like a prick and not because you are disabled, then you don’t really have a [del]leg to stand on[/del] case.
I had assumed you were talking about some private gym facility, which would be bad enough. You’re really suing a non-profit hospital in an economically challenged community for not buying you a special piece of gym equipment? Wow.
Twickster correctly pointed out that this thread is about the letter Jamie posted about in the OP.
However, to reply to your post, I believe he posted in one of his previous threads that he received a large malpractice settlement due to the surgery that caused his disability. Surgery that was required because Jamie was drunk-driving and was in an accident.
He’s also posted that he was broke and couldn’t get gas because of a minor bank error. So whatever settlement he received seems to have already evaporated.
I hope this doesn’t violate the mod-warning, but I do think it’s related to the OP’s motives in bringing suit against the HMCC.
Alright, didnt want to get you into trouble. I had only skipped on the first posts by JamieMcGarry, you seem to have actually read them. Didnt know the full story.
Sounds like the only way they’re going to investigate would be if the respondent declines mediation AND the department thinks you have a case. I don’t think you do, and it seems they don’t either. Maybe it’s time to buy your own equipment.
As others have said, it’s just a standard form letter to the effect of “deal with it yourself as best you can; it’s not something we want to be involved in” which really makes sense, since the gym did provide you access to the equipment.
This is really no different than if you were to sue them for not having a stationary bike you could use. Could they provide a stationary bike designed for upper body use rather than leg use? Yes, they could. Is it reasonable to expect them to do so? No, it is not. It’s the reasonableness that you need to consider here.