Bad experience Lancaster KOA

KOA should have just given the guest 15 minutes to pick up the disabled person. That would have been a reasonable solution, and an exception, since she is clearly disabled.

Make it clear if the guests stayed any longer...then charge the fee either to the guest or put in on the Site Charge.

This would be the only circumstance to allow a 15 minute pick up. KOA cannot monitor every guest coming in and out to pick people up...then they end up in the pool, restrooms, staying over, wherever.

In matter of fact the ADA compels reasonable accommodation and access not only on employers but also for the public at large in all businesses.

Again, "reasonable accommodation" covers employment, public accommodations are a bit different. From the Department of Justice ADA page:

Public accommodations must --
Provide goods and services in an integrated setting, unless separate or different measures are necessary to ensure equal opportunity.

Eliminate unnecessary eligibility standards or rules that deny individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to enjoy the goods and services of a place of public accommodation.

Make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures that deny equal access to individuals with disabilities, unless a fundamental alteration would result in the nature of the goods and services provided.

Furnish auxiliary aids when necessary to ensure effective communication, unless an undue burden or fundamental alteration would result.

Remove architectural and structural communication barriers in existing facilities where readily achievable.

Provide readily achievable alternative measures when removal of barriers is not readily achievable.

Provide equivalent transportation services and purchase accessible vehicles in certain circumstances.

Maintain accessible features of facilities and equipment.

Design and construct new facilities and, when undertaking alterations, alter existing facilities in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines issued by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board and incorporated in the final Department of Justice title III regulation.

A public accommodation is not required to provide personal devices such as wheelchairs; individually prescribed devices (e.g., prescription eyeglasses or hearing aids); or services of a personal nature including assistance in eating, toileting, or dressing.

Just as a public accommodation isn't required to provide wheelchairs, they are probably not going to be required to provide a shuttle service when that is apparently not needed to access the campground, but just to most easily leave the campground without the camper's guests having to pay the uniformly imposed guest fee. Now that's not to say that the campground is following best practices - imposing a guest fee on those just picking up campers for off premises activity is a bit over the top, although I can understand campgrounds not wanting to police this. The overall attitude of the ownership may be more of a problem than the specific action here, which probably isn't an ADA violation unless the law is interpreted more expansively than is presently the case.

soren wrote:

westernrvparkowner wrote:

avan wrote:
ADA requires reasonable accommodation of the disability. Based on OP's description, what was requested was reasonable if the distance from the campsite to the gate could not be easily traversed by the HC person. In addition to posting to the various campsite review sites, formal ADA complaint should be filed with a copy to the CG and to KOA main office.

It is this thinking that causes businesses to want to get any disabled person in and out as soon as possible. The Drumbeat of sue, sue, sue makes businesses fear the disabled customer, not want to accommodate them. It is this thinking that causes businesses to want to get any disabled person in and out as soon as possible. The Drumbeat of sue, sue, sue makes businesses fear the disabled customer, not want to accommodate them.
As far as whether or not the requests were reasonable, in my opinion absolutely not. Why should a disabled person get to bring in guests without a fee when everyone else has to pay. Not all parks have the ability to monitor all visitors. We can, but we are in Montana and very few of our guests from Thailand have visitors stopping by. But if a park is located a short distance from major metro areas and serves primarily locals, it would be close to impossible to administer some visitors in free and others pay.
As for the golf cart, our insurance specifies that we are not to allow any non employee to operate or ride in park vehicles. Maybe as the owner I would take that chance, buy I don't empower my employees to make that decision.

You have a well earned reputation on this site, and it isn't a good one. However, this may be a new low, even for you. My wife has been severely disabled for over two decades, and has NEVER experienced the mentality you express. Fortunately, if and when it happens, there are a number of avenues available from a governmental and legal standpoint, to make somebody like you suffer a significant price for singling out disabled folks for abusive treatment. BTW, one of the most memorable experiences we had while traveling was a CG owner who realized that my DW would end up struggling while accessing one of his buildings. He asked us to give him an hour or two, and spent that time with a tractor and a crew, while he pulled a patch of unused sidewalk up, and reinstalled it, to create a smaller step in to his lodge. That is what have character means, not trying to get disabled folks of your property, ASAP, since they might have issue with your attitude and behavior. WOW, you really hit bottom on this one........................you must be proud.

The OP..remember?? the one who started this thread.. was not singled out for anything. Everyone has to pay the price or dont come in.

lots2seeinmyrv wrote:
KOA should have just given the guest 15 minutes to pick up the disabled person. That would have been a reasonable solution, and an exception, since she is clearly disabled.

Why do you say she's clearly disabled?

Here's what the OP said:

Wife has mobility issues & uses cane/ walker. Asked if our friends could come to pick us up without paying $18 fee- NO. Could you take her in golf cart to gate - NO, it's for work. Can you please make an exception. NO. So, we walked. Will never stay there again.

The OP's wife was able to walk to the gate. So it looks like they didn't want to pay the guest fee (which I understand), but (1) it doesn't sound like the wife is "clearly disabled," and (2) they could have had just one friend drive the car in to lower the guest fee if that really was the only way for them to be able to go out with their friends and the guest fee was prohibitive. Instead they chose to walk.

I've stayed at KOAs that had a similarly strict guest-fee policy and KOAs that didn't have any guest fees. I've also stayed at non-KOAs that had similarly strict guest-fee policies and non-KOAs that didn't have any guest fees.

jplante4 wrote:
On edit, I checked this CG on RV Park Reviews and there were several reviewers that mentioned that the owners were rude and didn't care, and KOA corporate said this CG is doing the bare minimum to be a KOA franchise.

I looked at RVParkReviews and KOA Corporate did NOT say this. A reviewer mentioned calling KOA corporate to file a complaint and added, "You can tell they are doing 'just enough' to get by as a KOA." That's the reviewer's statement, not KOA Corporate's.

The OP..remember?? the one who started this thread.. was not singled out for anything. Everyone has to pay the price or dont come in.


My response was specifically addressing WRVPO's sickening attitude toward disabled guests, not the OP's complaint. That said, being denied the ability to have someone enter the park, briefly, to pick up a disabled guest, without an outrageous fee, is a pretty textbook definition of failing to make reasonable accommodation. Not only would this situation look pretty bad in the local press, and any RV review site that is willing to post it, but it's well worth contacting the state's disability advocate office with the info.

Not sure what you have against WRVPO, but I would stay at his campground anytime.

The policy at that KOA is stupid, but it is what is.

If this is the CG they sure have more positive comments than negative...and by a wide margin.

Just saying....

Quote.....By WRVPO....
It is this thinking that causes businesses to want to get any disabled person in and out as soon as possible. The Drumbeat of sue, sue, sue makes businesses fear the disabled customer, not want to accommodate them. It is this thinking that causes businesses to want to get any disabled person in and out as soon as possible. The Drumbeat of sue, sue, sue makes businesses fear the disabled customer, not want to accommodate them.
As far as whether or not the requests were reasonable, in my opinion absolutely not. Why should a disabled person get to bring in guests without a fee when everyone else has to pay. Not all parks have the ability to monitor all visitors. We can, but we are in Montana and very few of our guests from Thailand have visitors stopping by. But if a park is located a short distance from major metro areas and serves primarily locals, it would be close to impossible to administer some visitors in free and others pay.
As for the golf cart, our insurance specifies that we are not to allow any non employee to operate or ride in park vehicles. Maybe as the owner I would take that chance, buy I don't empower my employees to make that decision. Unquote.

I read the Op as saying they wanted KOA to allow their friends to come and pick them up.(not to be GUESTS at their site )

Does this mean that if I stayed at this KOA or at WRVPO's place It would be right to have to pay an $18.00 fee to have a taxi pick me up and then another $18.00 for a taxi to drop me off again , cause that is all the friends were going to do???

ADA requires reasonable accommodation of the disability.

This applies more in the workplace for employees. What applies in the campground is access to the facilities. It does not require special treatment. No grounds for a lawsuit.

The disagreement on this thread is what is a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. If you read the post by NoVa RT who looked up public accommodations, a reasonable person can understand that providing a ride to the gate is not reasonable accommodation under ADA guidelines.

Regarding the fee - this paragraph seems to cover it:

Make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures that deny equal access to individuals with disabilities, unless a fundamental alteration would result in the nature of the goods and services provided.

Providing an exception to the 18 dollar entrance fee would be a nice thing for the CG to have done, but a reasonable person can see it from a business owners standpoint that this type of thing can cascade. So yes - a nice thing to do, but not unlawful not to do.

CG's usually have a staff of few people - not a security detail.

Maybe they need to stay at the CG where reportedly the owner took a work crew and demoed the sidewalk and totally rebuilt it in a few hours.

If you don't like the treatment you received at an establishment, your well within your rights to tell others here and on the multiple review sites.