What to Do in the First 72 Hours After an ADA Demand Letter

what to do in the first 72 hours after an ada demand letter

A website accessibility demand letter usually arrives without warning. It’s often a two-to-five page PDF from a law firm. The letter claims that your website violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) because people with disabilities cannot use parts of the site.

Most letters include a short list of accessibility failures. Missing alt text. Broken keyboard navigation. Inaccessible forms. Sometimes the letter references the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 or WCAG 2.0 Level AA.

The letter also includes a deadline. Sometimes ten days. Sometimes fourteen. A settlement demand may follow.

The first reaction is usually panic. Business owners start calling developers, deleting pages, installing accessibility plugins, or replying directly to the law firm. That tends to make things worse.

The first 72 hours after receiving an ADA demand letter are mostly about control. Preserve information. Verify what actually exists on the site. Avoid actions that create new legal problems.

This guide walks through what typically happens during those first three days.

Not theory. Actual steps used by companies that deal with these letters every week.

hour 0 to hour 6: read the letter and document it

The first thing to do is read the letter carefully. Slowly.

Most ADA demand letters contain four pieces of information:

• the law firm name
• the plaintiff’s name
• the website domain
• a list of alleged accessibility barriers

Some letters attach screenshots. Others just describe problems.

For example, a 2023 demand letter sent by the New York firm Stein Saks, PLLC included this line:

“The website fails to provide alternative text for product images, preventing blind users from understanding the content.”

That wording shows up in hundreds of letters every year.

Do not reply immediately. Do not call the lawyer.

First step is documentation.

Save the letter exactly as received. PDF, email headers, envelope if it came by mail.

Then record the date and time.

If the letter arrived Tuesday at 9:30 AM, write that down. Deadlines in these letters are often counted from the delivery date.

Create a simple internal record:

Date received:
Time received:
Sender:
Law firm:
Domain mentioned:

That record matters later.

Some companies lose track of the original letter. It sounds unlikely, but it happens. Someone forwards it internally. Someone edits the PDF. A developer copies text out of it.

Keep the original version untouched.

hour 6 to hour 24: stop making random website changes

Many business owners react by immediately changing the website.

They delete images. They install accessibility overlays. They disable parts of the checkout process. Someone pastes alt text everywhere.

That impulse creates problems.

Accessibility lawsuits usually depend on proving what the website looked like when the plaintiff visited it. If the site changes before anyone documents the original version, evidence disappears.

Lawyers notice that.

Instead of making quick fixes, capture the current state of the website.

Do three things.

First, take full-page screenshots of key areas:

Home page
Navigation menu
Product pages
Forms
Checkout pages

Second, record a short screen video of basic navigation. Use the keyboard to move through the site. Try the tab key.

Third, archive the site using a crawler like Screaming Frog SEO Spider or Sitebulb. Those tools download HTML snapshots of pages.

This step preserves the record of the site before remediation begins.

document the accessibility complaints

Demand letters usually list specific accessibility problems.

Some examples pulled from real cases:

• “Images lack alternative text”
• “Navigation menus cannot be accessed via keyboard”
• “Form fields are not labeled”
• “Videos lack captions”

Copy those claims into a separate document.

List them one by one.

Then compare them to the site.

Sometimes the claims are accurate. Sometimes they are not.

In one 2022 retail case, the demand letter said a website had “no alt text across the entire domain.” The company’s audit later showed that 87 percent of images already had alt attributes.

That doesn’t end the case. But it changes the conversation.

hour 24 to hour 48: contact a lawyer who handles accessibility cases

ADA website demand letters fall under disability law and civil rights law. A general business lawyer may not handle them regularly.

Accessibility litigation has its own patterns. Deadlines. Settlement ranges. Technical requirements.

In the United States, several firms handle large numbers of these cases.

Examples include:

• Seyfarth Shaw LLP (Chicago)
• Duane Morris LLP (Philadelphia)
• Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP (Los Angeles)

These firms have defended companies in ADA website cases for years.

When contacting a lawyer, send the original demand letter and the documentation created earlier.

Do not summarize it. Send the full letter.

Lawyers look for specific details:

• whether the letter is a demand or a filed lawsuit
• whether the plaintiff has filed other cases
• which federal district court might be involved

Some plaintiffs file hundreds of ADA website cases. Public court records show this.

For example, Juan Carlos Gil, a blind plaintiff in Florida, filed more than 100 website accessibility lawsuits between 2017 and 2021.

That information shapes legal strategy.

verify whether the complaint came before or after a lawsuit filing

Not all demand letters are the same.

Some arrive before any lawsuit exists. They are settlement attempts.

Others arrive after a lawsuit has already been filed in federal court.

The difference matters.

Federal lawsuits appear in the PACER system (Public Access to Court Electronic Records). Lawyers check PACER immediately to see if a complaint already exists.

If a lawsuit is filed, response deadlines are strict. Usually 21 days after service.

If the letter is only a demand, negotiation may start before any court action.

hour 48 to hour 72: run a real accessibility audit

By the second or third day, companies usually start technical analysis of the website.

Automated scanning tools help identify obvious issues.

Common tools include:

• Axe DevTools
• WAVE accessibility checker
• Google Lighthouse

These tools scan pages for code-level accessibility errors.

Typical findings include:

• missing alt attributes
• color contrast failures
• empty links
• form input errors

But scanners detect only part of the problem.

Accessibility consultants often cite a statistic repeated in accessibility training: automated tools detect roughly 20–30 percent of WCAG failures.

Manual testing fills the gap.

That includes:

• keyboard-only navigation testing
• screen reader testing using NVDA or JAWS
• focus order inspection
• form submission testing

A developer running Lighthouse alone will miss many interaction problems.

a real example: checkout failure on a retail site

A mid-sized clothing retailer in Texas received a demand letter in April 2022.

The complaint said blind users could not complete checkout.

Automated scans showed only minor issues. Color contrast errors. Missing alt text on a few decorative images.

Manual testing told a different story.

When a screen reader user reached the checkout form, validation errors appeared visually but were not announced by assistive technology. The user could not tell why the form failed.

The issue involved WCAG 2.1 Success Criterion 3.3.1 (Error Identification).

The fix required adding ARIA live regions so screen readers would announce validation errors.

No automated scanner flagged that.

The company eventually settled the claim and implemented a full accessibility remediation plan.

avoid accessibility overlays during the first response phase

Accessibility overlay tools promise instant compliance. Many advertise automated fixes using JavaScript.

Examples include accessiBe, UserWay, and AudioEye.

Some companies install these tools immediately after receiving a demand letter.

That decision carries risk.

In October 2021, more than 400 accessibility professionals signed an open letter criticizing accessibility overlays. The letter said overlays often fail to fix structural accessibility issues and may interfere with assistive technologies.

The letter was published by Overlay Fact Sheet, a project created by accessibility advocate Adrian Roselli.

Overlay tools adjust presentation layers. They do not repair underlying code.

Lawyers involved in ADA litigation are familiar with overlays. Installing one rarely resolves the legal claim by itself.

preserve internal communication

During the first three days, internal communication multiplies quickly.

Emails. Slack messages. Developer notes. Legal discussions.

Keep those organized.

Accessibility lawsuits sometimes involve discovery. That means internal documents may be requested.

Avoid speculative language in writing.

Statements like “our site has always been inaccessible” or “we ignored accessibility for years” create problems later.

Stick to factual documentation.

Example:

“Received ADA demand letter on May 12. Beginning accessibility audit.”

Short. Neutral.

estimate the scope of remediation

After the initial audit begins, developers usually want to know how big the problem is.

Accessibility remediation costs vary widely.

A small brochure site with 20 pages may need a few days of work.

A large ecommerce platform with thousands of product pages can take months.

Typical remediation tasks include:

• rewriting alt text for images
• restructuring navigation menus
• fixing form labels and validation messages
• improving color contrast
• adjusting heading hierarchy
• adding captions or transcripts to videos

Costs vary.

Some accessibility consulting firms charge $150 to $300 per hour for manual audits. Full site remediation projects often reach five figures for large sites.

That reality often surprises companies that assumed accessibility meant adding a plugin.

understand the legal standard being cited

Most ADA website complaints reference the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

WCAG is published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).

The most commonly cited version in U.S. lawsuits is WCAG 2.1 Level AA.

WCAG includes 50 success criteria at that level.

Examples include:

• 1.1.1 Non-text Content (alt text for images)
• 1.4.3 Contrast (minimum)
• 2.1.1 Keyboard accessibility
• 3.3.2 Labels or instructions
• 4.1.2 Name, role, value

Demand letters often cite only a few examples, but the expectation is broader compliance.

do not admit liability in early communication

Some business owners reply to demand letters immediately.

They apologize. They promise compliance. They admit the site has accessibility barriers.

That communication may later appear in legal filings.

Early responses should go through legal counsel.

Short acknowledgment letters are common. They confirm receipt of the complaint and state that the company is reviewing the issues.

Nothing more.

check whether the plaintiff has filed similar cases

ADA website lawsuits often follow patterns.

Some plaintiffs file dozens or hundreds of cases.

Public court databases reveal this quickly.

For example:

• Camacho v. Vanderbilt University (2018) involved a blind plaintiff who filed lawsuits against dozens of colleges.
• Gil v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. (2017) became one of the first major federal trials over website accessibility.

Looking at a plaintiff’s litigation history helps lawyers estimate how the case may proceed.

Some plaintiffs settle quickly. Others pursue court judgments.

accessibility fixes should be documented

When remediation begins, document everything.

Record dates. Code changes. testing results.

Example:

May 15
Added alt text to 312 product images

May 16
Rebuilt navigation menu for keyboard support

May 18
Tested checkout form with NVDA screen reader

Documentation matters.

If a lawsuit continues, showing active remediation can influence settlement discussions.

Courts also consider whether businesses made good-faith efforts to improve accessibility.

understand the limitation of quick fixes

Some accessibility problems are simple.

Missing alt attributes take minutes to fix.

Others require deeper changes.

Keyboard accessibility often involves rewriting JavaScript behavior.

Video captioning requires transcription work.

Legacy content management systems sometimes generate inaccessible markup automatically.

Those structural problems take longer to repair.

Trying to fix everything in a few days rarely works.

accessibility demand letters are common in ecommerce

Retail websites receive a large share of ADA website complaints.

Online stores contain many interactive elements:

• product galleries
• filters
• dropdown menus
• checkout forms

Each interaction introduces accessibility risk.

A keyboard-only user must be able to move through every element.

Screen readers must announce changes in content.

If any part fails, a user may not complete a purchase.

That barrier often appears in legal complaints.

the first 72 hours are about information control

By the third day after receiving a demand letter, several things should exist:

• a copy of the original letter
• a documented snapshot of the website
• a legal review of the complaint
• an accessibility audit in progress

No rushed public statements.

No random site changes.

No admissions of liability.

Just facts.

The legal and technical strategy develops after that point.